Feed on Posts or Comments 09 February 2016

Christianity &Islam Thomas on 06 Jul 2013 12:04 am

The insanity of Christianity: Prayer edition

This article starts with the following inspirational paragraph:

Have you ever known someone who really trusts God? When I was an atheist, I had a good friend who prayed often. She would tell me every week about something she was trusting God to take care of. And every week I would see God do something unusual to answer her prayer. Do you know how difficult it is for an atheist to observe this week after week? After a while, “coincidence” begins to sound like a very weak argument.

Doesn’t that sound exciting? “Every week I would see God do something unusual to answer her prayer.”

If this is true, why doesn’t she pray to end cancer worldwide? Why doesn’t she pray to end world hunger? If God will do something unusual every week to answer her prayers, why not pray for something that will substantially improve life on earth for everyone? This is where the insanity comes in, as seen in this paragraph:

For those who do know him and rely on him, Jesus seems to be wildly generous in his offer: “If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be given you.”5 To “remain” in him and have his words remain in them means they conduct their lives aware of him, relying on him, listening to what he says. Then they’re able to ask him whatever they want. Here is another qualifier: “This is the confidence we have in approaching God: that if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us. And if we know that he hears us — whatever we ask — we know that we have what we asked of him.”6 God answers our prayers according to his will (and according to his wisdom, his love for us, his holiness, etc.).

What is hard to understand about, “ask whatever you wish, and it will be given you”? But it never happens when praying for anything real like a worldwide cure for cancer. Now a Christian has to explain why Jesus would say something that is wrong. So they say, “God answers our prayers according to his will (and according to his wisdom, his love for us, his holiness, etc.)” Which is to say that God answers zero prayers of substance. This is the insanity. Christians believe that God answers prayers, even though God never, ever answers concrete prayers that would improve life for everyone.

1,160 Responses to “The insanity of Christianity: Prayer edition”

  1. on 09 Aug 2013 at 5:17 pm 1.Angus and Alexis said …

    “I already did.”

    Alright, list the comment number and blog post.

    “Atheists dismissed it as it doesn’t confirm their bizarro version of the ToE and, like I’ve already said, that’s not my problem.”

    God=/=Evolution…

    “like I’ve already said, that’s not my problem.”

    Nice, not as if you copied that line or anything….

    “There we go. God meets the same standard of proof atheists use for ToE.”

    So far i have on theist proof.
    Magic.
    God did it.
    Bible is true because god says so.

    ToE has physical testable evidence…

  2. on 09 Aug 2013 at 6:41 pm 2.A said …

    “ToE has physical testable evidence”

    Great, lets see it!! I’ll get the popcorn!

    Never mind Agnus you and your tulip never provide any evidence. But you did figure out out I copied my above response. Well Done! Lol!!!

    sigh!

  3. on 10 Aug 2013 at 2:02 am 3.Angus and Alexis said …

    “Never mind Agnus you and your tulip never provide any evidence. But you did figure out out I copied my above response. Well Done! Lol!!!”

    Okay…
    Anyone here have the contacts for the admin? I would really enjoy seeing this guy IP banned…

    Secondly, “I already did. You dismissed it as it doesn’t confirm your bizarro version of the ToE and, like I’ve already said, that’s not my problem.” (Thanks freddie for that line, its great XD)

    Literally, there is one ToE that is agreed on by scientists…

    And again you have misspelled not only my name, but my tulpa’s (Alexis…)

  4. on 10 Aug 2013 at 2:37 am 4.thomas said …

    A, I get what you’re saying in all and I appreciate you having my back, but you said that athiests believe in nature, the great programmer and designer. That’s contradicting man because that’s what we believe in. We just believe in God, the great programmer and designer. And that’s just calling yourself crazy. What I would say is both sides know that there is earth and life, I mean clearly those are two real things. We just explain it through God, atheists explain through science. Though I will always be a firm believer in God, both science and God end up in this beautiful planet being form. Both are two things I enjoy exploring deeper. You just gotta be careful with the way you say things. Thanks guys. Bless you all

  5. on 10 Aug 2013 at 3:02 am 5.A said …

    “We just believe in God, the great programmer and designer”

    Thomas, I doubt you know much about what I believe but let me ask. You cannot see a HUGE difference in nature randomly writing a high information program like DNA vs a Deity designing the entire process?

    Second, atheists do not explain it through science, they attempt to avoid and deflect. Science follows the scientific method. Just read the thread.

    Third, don’t take this blog seriously. It’s just for some fun.

  6. on 10 Aug 2013 at 3:37 am 6.alex said …

    “Third, don’t take this blog seriously. It’s just for some fun.”

    dude, your porn has finished loaded. quit stalking this blog and repeatedly questioning atheists. telling you again and again. atheists being wrong doesn’t prove shit about your god, you dumb motherfucker.

  7. on 10 Aug 2013 at 2:54 pm 7.michelle said …

    DPK,

    apparently i do seem like that. I am just pre-ocupied.

    you will never be able to prove the effect of the fire until you go in it’s presence and even better, put your hand in it. Stretching a long stick from a distance will not help either.

  8. on 10 Aug 2013 at 2:56 pm 8.michelle said …

    DPK,

    apparently i do seem like that. I am just pre-ocupied.

  9. on 10 Aug 2013 at 2:59 pm 9.michelle said …

    All this could be settled if there was enough courage(faith)of one or the other to put their hand in the fire and stop stretching a long stick in it from a distance.

  10. on 10 Aug 2013 at 4:10 pm 10.alex said …

    bring it at wwghatoday at gmail.

  11. on 10 Aug 2013 at 4:11 pm 11.alex said …

    you can eeemail me at wwghatoday.
    geemail that is.

  12. on 10 Aug 2013 at 6:44 pm 12.DPK said …

    Michelle, I noticed you conveniently avoided answering the question though. Why is that?
    And if by “putting your hand in the fire” you mean openly asking god into your life… what makes you think I haven’t been there and done that?
    You presume that everyone get the same ability to accept on faith. But if your god is real, you must ask yourself why he has supposedly revealed himself to you, but not to me? It hasn’t been for lack of trying to believe on my part. If your god is real, you must also accept the fact that he created me this way… why would he do that?
    And come on… don’t be a coward and cop out of the conversation with Sunday morning platitudes and sound bites about fires and sticks… you claim there is but one true god whom can only be proven to oneself… does that mean that your claim is that all the other gods that people currently believe in, or have believed in in the past, are all completely imaginary?
    Pretty simple question, but we understand why you are so reluctant to answer it honestly.

  13. on 10 Aug 2013 at 7:43 pm 13.Curmudgeon said …

    “Thats contradicting man because that’s what we believe in. We just believe in God”

    Just believe in God? Oh, is that all? My laptop just has a CPU. Thomas the entire issue of the blog is God and you seem to pass it off as an incidental.

    For me and most of us God’s existence is not an issue but for atheists, denial is the center piece of their existence.

  14. on 10 Aug 2013 at 8:48 pm 14.DPK said …

    “For me and most of us God’s existence is not an issue but for atheists, denial is the center piece of their existence.”
    and yet, when you get sick, you go to a doctor and not a church. I’ll bet you look before you cross the street too. Your belief and trust in your all powerful god buddy ends at the church door where reality begins.

  15. on 10 Aug 2013 at 9:00 pm 15.alex said …

    “Your belief and trust in your all powerful god buddy ends at the church door…”

    the dipshit is not that much different from atheists. except to loudly pontificate and pronounce their righteousness while at the same time, like you said, doing all the things that atheists do, like reaping the benefits of science and crying at funerals.

    denial is IN their existence.

    go ahead and pray morons and i’ll pray to the milk jug and we’ll compare results.

  16. on 11 Aug 2013 at 2:30 am 16.Angus and Alexis said …

    I would love to see like…IDK…1 billion christians pray to solve something (World hunger, cancer, making the deathstar?), just to see that it obviously fails, then for someone to say “Told you…”

  17. on 11 Aug 2013 at 2:32 am 17.Curmudgeon said …

    ” you get sick, you go to a doctor and not a church. I’ll bet you look before you cross the street too.”

    You know I do go to MDs on occasion and I do look before I cross a street. You got me.

  18. on 11 Aug 2013 at 2:44 am 18.alex said …

    “You know I do go to MDs on occasion and I do look before I cross a street.”

    and you do carry your redemption card just in case, righto? an atheist molests a child and he’s doubly wicked while you fucking morons smugly/righteously proclaim your god given right to wipe your slate clean and do it again. yep, i’m supposed to believe..

    i’d rather worship the moon.

  19. on 11 Aug 2013 at 3:05 am 19.DPK said …

    You know I do go to MDs on occasion and I do look before I cross a street. You got me.

    Of course you do. Like most of the vast majority that you claim “believes” in the benevolence of an all powerful being and the unlimited power of prayer, when it comes down to nuts and bolts you know it isn’t true.
    Remember the story of Paul walking on water? He almost drowned because he didn’t have 100% faith in Jesus alone.

    Now, answer this, if you went to a doctor and he said, ” you have diabetes… My medical advice is to go home and pray really hard to be cured. That will fix it.”
    Would you accept that as good sound advice, or would you be looking for another doctor? And why?

  20. on 11 Aug 2013 at 1:57 pm 20.Angus and Alexis said …

    DPK asked
    “Now, answer this, if you went to a doctor and he said, ” you have diabetes… My medical advice is to go home and pray really hard to be cured. That will fix it.”
    Would you accept that as good sound advice, or would you be looking for another doctor? And why?”

    *Throws logic out the window.*

    Pfft, of course i would pray, after all, god loves me and is omnipotent, i mean…
    I could ask for a cure for cancer, world hunger or get super powers or something, but i guess i should only use UNLIMITED POWER for trivial tasks, like football goals and finding kittens or something…

    *Logic turns on*

    I would get a different doctor, then sue the old one out of his job just to make sure some poor fool doesnt die from him…

  21. on 11 Aug 2013 at 4:52 pm 21.DPK said …

    The dichotomy of the faithful. They all tell you that god answers prayers, but that god already knows what is best, and that is what will happen… even if what is best for you is getting cancer or having a stroke. But then why do you pray? The ones who refuse to take their kids to the doctors and rely on prayer to heal them go to jail or get locked up in the nut farm, but the same lawyers and judges who lock them up because they KNOW they are crazy to expect prayer to heal a sick child are the very ones at church on Sunday listening to how you need to have faith and god will always answer your prayers.
    You need to have fucking multiple personality disorder to be a believer… and that’s no lie.
    D

  22. on 11 Aug 2013 at 5:01 pm 22.A said …

    “Would you accept that as good sound advice”

    No, I would ask since God has given us the gift of insulin why can’t I use that?

    Of Christian doctors do prescribe insulin so it must be atheist doctors who give such idiotic advice. They should be removed.

    Insulin had been shown to work using the scientific method.

  23. on 11 Aug 2013 at 5:05 pm 23.A said …

    Cur,

    How could you! Don’t you realize doctors, buying food an getting power in your home means you don’t believe in God!

    lol!!!, the sad part is they are really this ignorant! Lol!!!

  24. on 11 Aug 2013 at 5:22 pm 24.DPK said …

    “God has given us the gift of insulin”

    gee, I missed that story. When did god show up and give us insulin? I thought science did that. And which god exactly gave us insulin, Stan? The same one that gave us neuroblastoma?
    Now, if god gave us insulin, makes you wonder why god gave us diabetes in the first place.

    lol, the sad part is, yes, they are really that ignorant.

  25. on 11 Aug 2013 at 5:55 pm 25.alex said …

    “…why god gave us diabetes…”

    well, what are we supposed to do with insulin?

    “You need to have fucking multiple personality disorder to be a believer”

    or be a total dumbass like our resident sock/ass.

    anybody taking my challenge? i prays to the milk jug and we’ll keep score. who dares?

  26. on 11 Aug 2013 at 7:33 pm 26.A said …

    “gee, I missed that story.”

    who is Stan? And don’t you know Agnus kikes you to get names correct.

    So you missed where God created all things and that God gives all good gifts? Geez, that’s right in the Bible an atheist claim to know the Bible, lol!!!!!

    I forget, atheists believe nature created itself and then nature created all things, lol!!!

  27. on 11 Aug 2013 at 7:41 pm 27.alex said …

    “atheists believe nature created itself and then nature created all things”

    lying bitch motherfuckers will not be allowed to fabricate. cite it, or otherwise your silence admits your guilt. as usual, you will throw out some swimming ocean shit, or toe, or obama.

    you lying asshole, let’s have a praying contest, motherfucker.

  28. on 11 Aug 2013 at 9:18 pm 28.DPK said …

    Alex, in Genesis it says:

    “And on the 6th day, god created diabetes, cancer, cholera and dysentery, and all manner of sickness and misery, and he saw that it was kinda fucked up, but said, ‘too fucking bad, you human pigs. I in my infinite wisdom and power have decided to give you a perfectly designed body that is prone to all manner of illness and disease. I do this so you don’t forget who the fuck is in charge around here.”

    A little known additional verse that was eliminated after the Council of Carthage which read:

    And the Lord sayeth, “If I give you fucking cancer or the plague or aids or some shit like that, thou shalt not fuck with me by trying to get rid of it. If I want you to be cured, I alone will decide that.”

    True story… it was in the original account of creation, but the local leech growers and “doctors” of the time had a strong union, and the pressured Charlemagne to drop that part, for fear that the bleeding and animal sacrifice business would suffer.

  29. on 11 Aug 2013 at 9:53 pm 29.alex said …

    if the cancer is not cured, it’s not in god’s will? but if it’s cured, it’s a miracle? i got it! the prayer is useless bullshit!

    still, the wife doesn’t deserve cancer, only the fucking atheists do, so let’s all pray and look cool and righteous and shit. when she goes, we’ll see her lesbian ass in the bullshit heaven, cavorting with the virgens.

  30. on 12 Aug 2013 at 12:02 am 30.Angus and Alexis said …

    “who is Stan?”

    I know stan is some moronic person who has a cersored blog to make sure he doesnt get beaten in a debate on his own website. I personally havent been here long enough to know how you are that person. (Can any one inform me of how this came to be?)

    But you are also proven to be curm/40 year old/xenon/ and more…

    “So you missed where God created all things and that God gives all good gifts?”

    Then why did he create such horrific bad things? Why not stop at something less serious than cancer like the flu, diseaseless mosquitos or flying piranhas or something?

    DPK joked (nice post BTW, laughed alot at it)
    “I in my infinite wisdom and power have decided to give you a perfectly designed body”

    Apparently we were created in gods image…
    Shame that the human body is a pathetic design with more flaws than Windows Vista….
    Therefore god is also a design failure…wait….who made god?

    alex said.
    “anybody taking my challenge? i prays to the milk jug and we’ll keep score. who dares?”

    I will pray to nothing about nothing, tell me if nothing happens to you. ;D

  31. on 12 Aug 2013 at 12:49 am 31.A said …

    “Shame that the human body is a pathetic design with more flaws than Windows Vista….”

    ROTFL!!!!!! That is the new atheist blog claim and the Tulip spits it out like truth. The human body is a bad design? This is how you make yourself feel better that blind chance designed a human being yet our most brilliant cannot mimic it.

    Funny?

    Check this out. The same human brain that is a poor design, Tulip and the atheist listen to for reasons believing in ToE. LOL!!!!!!! Remember it is a bad design so you cannot trust it Tulip.

    Hey, design a pump that will last as long as a heart. Also, no maintenance allowed.

    Tulip you are so brainwashed and ignorant I believe you will need to create another Tulip to have any chance of restoration. No I am not Stan but I know you don’t think for yourself. So hey, if you like believing, knock yourself out Agnus the Tulip.

  32. on 12 Aug 2013 at 1:42 am 32.DPK said …

    Angus, Stan is the 40 year a-hole, who is also A. Get got busted a few weeks back when he wrote a post in his A language, but forgot to chage his screen name from 40’s… He has also been outed several,other times by doing the same thing and revealing his other socks.
    He has proven himself to be a totally dishonest and amoral person, and deserves the contempt he receives here. He is a liar and a fraud. Nuff said. I now go back to ignoring him, which irks him no end. Watch… He will now try every trick in his troll book to get someone to pay attention to him. Sad.

  33. on 12 Aug 2013 at 10:17 am 33.Angus and Alexis said …

    DPK said. (ty for the info mate.)
    “Angus, Stan is the 40 year a-hole, who is also A. Get got busted a few weeks back when he wrote a post in his A language, but forgot to chage his screen name from 40?s… He has also been outed several,other times by doing the same thing and revealing his other socks.”

    xD
    Gah im so forgetfull, i just recalled his stupid forum has something to the likes of “40 year old atheist” on it, also, remember, i was the one who got him caught out using 40 year old as a puppet ;D

    A said
    “Hey, design a pump that will last as long as a heart. Also, no maintenance allowed.”

    Not particularly fair, as a heart needs to rely on maintenance, so making a maintenance free pump that is superior doesn’t prove anything…
    However, i would assume that there are superior animal hearts out there.

    “Tulip you are so brainwashed and ignorant I believe you will need to create another Tulip to have any chance of restoration.”

    Correction, i am a deluded tulpamancer.
    Although, i only want one tulpa….Alexis takes enough effort by herself…

    “That is the new atheist blog claim and the Tulip spits it out like truth. ”

    No, that was me, Alexis is incapable of speech.

    “The human body is a bad design?”

    Yes, as i stated earlier. Even our eyes are outmatched by eagles (most birds actually) and cephalopods…

    “The same human brain that is a poor design, Tulip and the atheist listen to for reasons believing in ToE.”

    Partly yes, partly no.
    While it is without a doubt our brains are advanced to the point of super computer type performance, we equally have a ridiculous amount of flaws.
    Mental disorders, strokes, etc.

    “This is how you make yourself feel better that blind chance designed a human being yet our most brilliant cannot mimic it.”

    No, that is myself stating the truth.
    Please remember that the truth is not always what you will enjoy.
    Like anyone else, i do not hate myself and my flaws (i have several physical issues, bad back, a lazy eye, etc), but i cannot dismiss the fact that humans are full of flaws that any designer would not have made. Hence the semi-randomness of evolution fits it far better, and doesnt include magic.

    “No I am not Stan but I know you don’t think for yourself.”

    What makes you think that? My tulpa?
    If you are going to make such ridiculous statements, at least put some effort into it.

    A&A

  34. on 12 Aug 2013 at 11:46 am 34.A said …

    ” it is without a doubt our brains are advanced to the point of super computer type performance, we equally have a ridiculous amount of flaws.
    Mental disorders, strokes”

    lol!! Yep and those brains came about through blind chance!. Yeah right! Disease is not design flaw. Agnus even though you made up a Robin to be your sidekick, you are not a superhero, you were born to eventually die. Only a blind fool would attempt to claim the human body is not incredibly complex and is not designed. Whatever helps you sleep Tulip.

    Figured out how that first DNA evolved yet?

  35. on 12 Aug 2013 at 12:28 pm 35.alex said …

    432.A said …

    bullshit alert. the resident sock/a/martin/40year is at it again. predictably pointing out irrelevant shit while refusing to prove his god.

    the certified purveyor of lies wants the same standard of proof? to the milk jug, i prays for: 1-cancer cure, 2-tiger woods breaking the record, 3-texas rain, & 4-for your ass to leave. why not pray to your bullshit god and we’ll compare results?

  36. on 12 Aug 2013 at 2:54 pm 36.DPK said …

    “Only a blind fool would attempt to claim the human body is not incredibly complex and is not designed.”

    And only an idiot would look out across the plains of the midwest and conclude that the world is round and not flat.

  37. on 12 Aug 2013 at 4:24 pm 37.freddies_dead said …

    Never mind A. We all know you’re incapable of giving us evidence for your God so we can go back to what you do so badly i.e. you avoiding questions while throwing out irrelevant diversions about evolution and answering yourself with whichever sock-puppet you think is best.

  38. on 12 Aug 2013 at 8:49 pm 38.40 Year Atheist said …

    I both am and am not a Presuppositionalist.

    First let’s get a feel for what Presuppositionalist Apologetics is. The following example is from carm.org:

    ”Allen: I am an atheist and evolutionist. Prove to me there is a God.

    Paul: I do not think I can do that, because of your presuppositions.

    Allen: Why not?

    Paul: Because your presuppositions will not allow you to examine without bias the evidence that I present to you for God’s existence.

    Allen: That is because there is no evidence for God’s existence.

    Paul: See? There you go. You just confirmed what I was stating.

    Allen: How so?

    Paul: Your presupposition is that there is no God; therefore, no matter what I might present to you to show His existence, you must interpret it in a manner consistent with your presupposition: namely, that there is no God. If I were to have a video tape of God coming down from heaven, you’d say it was a special effect. If I had a thousand eye-witnesses saying they saw Him, you’d say it was mass-hysteria. If I had Old Testament prophecies fulfilled in the New Testament, you’d say they were forged, dated incorrectly, or not real prophecies. So, I cannot prove anything to you since your presupposition won’t allow it. It is limited.

    Allen: It is not limited.

    Paul: Yes it is. Your presupposition cannot allow you to rightly determine God’s existence from evidence — providing that there were factual proofs of His existence. Don’t you see? If I DID have incontrovertible proof, your presupposition would force you to interpret the facts consistently with your presupposition and you would not be able to see the proof.
    Let’s break here, because this is the point where the presuppositionalists go idealist on us. The following exchange almost never occurs with Atheists, and when it does, in my experience, it is usually done dishonestly on the part of the Atheist. A person who is “open” is not an Atheist, he is a seeker.
    Allen: I see your point, but I am open to being persuaded, if you can.

    Paul: Then, I must ask you, what kind of evidence would you accept that would prove God’s existence? I must see what your presuppositions are and work either with them or against them.
    Where this goes awry is right here: “…I am open”…; this implies that the Atheist will accept logical argumentation, and will examine his own presuppositions using actual rational techniques.

    This will not occur. Here’s why:

    Atheists do not have presuppositions that are vulnerable to logic. Atheist presuppositions are emotional.

    The considerable emotional benefits which a vulnerable person derives from Atheism are virtually impregnable to disciplined, grounded logic. When a person revels in the “freedom” that accompanies the denial of authority, he becomes a virtual king, over whom no one and nothing presides, and that includes not just the rejection of absolute authority but the rejection of all absolutes including the axioms of rational thought.

    Thus there is no behavior or thought process which is “irrational” under the ideology of Atheism. For example, the Atheist cannot be proven “wrong” because he will claim not to have taken a position and so cannot be disproved. Or he will claim that there is “no evidence” just after having been handed evidence. Or he will claim no burden of rebuttal because the demand is “irrational” or “absurd” that he provide support for his worldview. No demonstration of the actual fallacies which the Atheist uses will convince him of his erroneous thought process.

    Atheism is rebellion; the rejection is an emotional reaction which has positive emotional effects for an emotionally needy individual. Some examples: There is no longer any responsibility to anyone, especially if one is a juvenile, which is when Atheism is usually adopted. There is no longer any moral responsibility; there is no longer any grounded logic or perception of irrationality in one’s behavior or thought about which to be concerned; most of all, there is elitism which is gained merely by association and gained so easily merely by saying “ain’t no god”. And significantly there is victimhood, cherished and nurtured and defining one’s relationship with society. Between the freedom, the elitism and the cherished, defining victimhood, Atheism provides a set of strong emotional props for the fragile ego. Their value is not in their rationality, so any charge of irrationality is without effect. Their value is in their emotional support for an emotionally weak and emotionally demanding existence.

    That is why Atheists do not seek logical answers: they seek continuous validation for their emotional demands, and that, for some, involves trying to destroy all challenges so that validation is not jeopardized. Watch the Atheist performance, as he denies all rational approaches and ignores his own fallacies. He merely wants to win, and nothing more. Quite often the argument which starts reasonably will turn into abject reactionary rejectionism and finally into to derogation and ridicule from the Atheist, as he abandons logic in favor of any attack that might preserve his emotional needs.

    For that reason, I don’t subscribe to Presuppositionalism, other than to agree that the Atheist presuppositional content is absolutely not rational. But it also is not open in the slightest, and has no use for either logic or rational thinking despite claiming to be the possessor of those traits. Atheists are not truth seekers (for them there is no truth, thus there is no reason to seek it – so they just declare it). They are extreme dogmatists, closed and irrational and emotionally attached to their ideology and fighting to preserve personal validation regardless of the tactic required. So I deal with Atheist presuppositions, but I have no delusions of being able to sway them, as the idealized conversation above shows. I do it because others need to see the irrationality involved in all Atheist thought, and I do it because I can.

  39. on 12 Aug 2013 at 9:38 pm 39.Anonymous said …

    FYI – I busted “A” for posting as the 40y-asshole (aka Stan) here – http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/blog/?p=2555#comment-54609

  40. on 12 Aug 2013 at 11:55 pm 40.Angus and Alexis said …

    “Yep and those brains came about through blind chance!.”

    When it comes to science, blind chance is always better to use rather than magic.

    “Disease is not design flaw.”

    Kind of is, if we had been designed by a perfect being in its image, our immune systems would be more advanced, hence making our vulnerability to disease a flaw.

    ” Agnus even though you made up a Robin to be your sidekick, you are not a superhero, you were born to eventually die.”

    First off, Alexis is not a sidekick, nor am i a superhero (Ability to fly or something would be nice though, save a lot of fuel…)

    And secondly, the concept of death is already known to me, ironically, i believe that you only get this one life and hence i spend every second of it doing what i want to do. Meanwhile you believe in heaven (and/or hell) and attempt to use “god” and “magic” despite all evidence showing said things do not exist.

    “Only a blind fool would attempt to claim the human body is not incredibly complex and is not designed.”

    Never said it was not complex, the human body is indeed complex, perhaps more so than any other creature in most ways. But if you want a good design, look at something simpler, an amoeba, a worm, water hydra, etc. Sure they are not the smartest of creatures (kinda the opposite…) but they have better genetic designs than we do. As i have said before, humans have more errors than Windows Vista, and if you are into computing, you will get what i mean…

  41. on 13 Aug 2013 at 4:34 pm 41.A said …

    “when it comes to science, blind chance is always better to use rather than magic”

    Agreed, so why are you resorting to “evolution diddit”

    That’s not an explanation it is just a way to avoid having to producing an explanation.

    DNA? ToE diddit!

    Brain? ToE diddit!

    lol!!

  42. on 13 Aug 2013 at 5:39 pm 42.alex said …

    “DNA? ToE diddit!
    Brain? ToE diddit!”

    dat why it’s taught in public schools. and yo skydaddy is only taught in your bullshit school? in between your perv sessions?

    you’ve lost the battle, so give it up. all youse got left is harrassing this blog.

  43. on 13 Aug 2013 at 11:32 pm 43.Anonymous said …

    “dat why it’s taught in public schools. and yo skydaddy is only taught in your bullshit school?”

    Right, and he only disagrees here to bait honest folks into playing his silly game.

    Yet people continue to allow the Assman troll to divert the conversation away from him providing evidence that supports his rather silly belief system.

    We call out Christians for continuing to pray despite there being no evidence that it works.

    Time and time again, year after year, Assman has shown his complete dishonesty and contempt for the posters here. For some reason though, people seem eager to play his game, even though they have less chance of him ever answering a question than someone coincidentally getting cured from cancer and attributing it to prayer.

  44. on 13 Aug 2013 at 11:57 pm 44.A said …

    “dat why it’s taught in public schools. and yo skydaddy is only taught in your bullshit school?”

    lol!! Did they teach you the vocabulary. Yes, if the public schools teach it must be fact. They have NEVER been wrong. So funny…..worst case, they take no position on God.

    They also very often teach there is a God. So, there is the evidence you seek Alexis.

    lol!!!!

  45. on 14 Aug 2013 at 12:04 am 45.alex said …

    “For some reason though, people seem eager to play his game…”

    lies and totally wrong statements demand responses. i’m sure if i said, all atheists are liberals, i’d expect to be quickly corrected. otoh, asshole’s repeated, predictable bullshit deserves contempt, ridicule and whatever shit he gets.

    in his fucked up mindset, any doubt, real, imagined, or however ridiculous, as long as he raises it, somehow validates his bullshit god. we all know it, but not responding somehow feels complicit.

  46. on 14 Aug 2013 at 12:23 am 46.alex said …

    ok motherfucker, public schools teach all the wrong shit. instead you want the schools to each your own brand eh? speak up dipshit, tell me why your god should be taught? the promise of virgins? the god that created real old fossils? lol? what motherfucker? scorn for you, ya bitch.

    btw, i is a college grad, software motherfucking architect. you? the astro dipshit?

  47. on 14 Aug 2013 at 1:28 am 47.A said …

    ” i is a college grad”

    lol!! i might be but not you. If you can manage to get your GED that will be quite the accomplishment little fella. Then you can work at moving out of mom and dad’s house.

    thank for coming, goodbye Alexis. Remember schools teach about God so be careful what finishing school you attend. Lol!!

  48. on 14 Aug 2013 at 1:52 am 48.alex said …

    Foreskins, motherfucker.

  49. on 14 Aug 2013 at 2:02 am 49.alex said …

    Lest we fergit, ina God inspired moronic fit.

    Martin: you are a brilliant man “Martin”. Way to put them in they place. <send> oh fuck! I just outed my own ass!

  50. on 14 Aug 2013 at 2:05 am 50.alex said …

    Yeah yeah, I know, twas your other sock…

  51. on 14 Aug 2013 at 5:24 am 51.Angus and Alexis said …

    “thank for coming, goodbye Alexis.”

    Alexis hasnt posted here…ever…thus she cannot leave…

    A said to alex
    “i might be but not you. If you can manage to get your GED that will be quite the accomplishment little fella. Then you can work at moving out of mom and dad’s house.”

    Care to explain how you know he is not a graduate?
    He did state he is not well at english, and once posted an IP checking website…

    alex said
    “Martin: you are a brilliant man “Martin”. Way to put them in they place. oh fuck! I just outed my own ass!”

    xD i remember that, what an idiot.

  52. on 14 Aug 2013 at 10:31 am 52.Angus and Alexis said …

    alex said.
    “Foreskins, motherfucker.”

    Yeah, i myself have always been confused on how they believe foreskins are evil or something, literally, unless you are an idiot, or have no hygiene skills whatsoever, they can’t get infected…

  53. on 14 Aug 2013 at 5:01 pm 53.DPK said …

    Let’s review… 446 comments later, not a single theist has presented any justification for belief in prayer, any evidence to suggest prayer actually has any effect, any explanation of how prayer fits into the definition of an omniscient god with perfect foreknowledge of what actually will occur, any attempt to reconcile the idea of asking god to change something when god already has a plan that is perfect and must unfold exactly as he has already determined, and absolutely no evidence whatsoever that anything remotely like a god actually exists.
    So, atheists 446, theists 0.
    About the only thing we have actually heard in the way of an argument for god is the tired and discredited “you can’t explain how the first molecule of DNA formed” and the resulting false conclusion that “therefore there must have been a magical god that did it…”
    This dead horse has been beaten far too long…

  54. on 14 Aug 2013 at 10:12 pm 54.alex said …

    “Of course their standard for God rises for God..”

    what a fucking joke. a nonexistent entity cannot have a standard and you a lyin bitch again. there aint no atheist god standard. your problem is you got no standard at all, drink the jonestown koolaid is youse motto.

    why don’t you idiots produce your prayer standard and we’ll apply it. compare your prayers versus not praying at all. you think your foreskin god will win?

    while you’re at it, produce your own morality test and i’ll take it. i guarandamnty my test results will be as good as your fucking righteous asses.

  55. on 14 Aug 2013 at 11:46 pm 55.Angus and Alexis said …

    *Throws logic out the window, again…*

    “any explanation of how prayer fits into the definition of an omniscient god with perfect foreknowledge of what actually will occur”

    God did it.

    “not a single theist has presented any justification for belief in prayer”

    God is mysterious in many ways.

    “and absolutely no evidence whatsoever that anything remotely like a god actually exists.”

    But the bible says god is real, and the bible must be true because it is gods word, and god is perfect!!! Thus god must be real. (Circular logic FTW)

    “So, atheists 446, theists 0.”

    Disprove god or he exists.

    ““you can’t explain how the first molecule of DNA formed””

    I fail to believe in DNA coming from nothing, instead i demand you believe man was made from dust and a woman from a RIB…Ohh and talking snakes, all include magic.

    ““therefore there must have been a magical god that did it…””

    Why not, you havent disproved it..

    So…Guys…Did i seem dumb enough to be a theist? ;D

    On serious note, some of their arguments are ridiculous…

  56. on 15 Aug 2013 at 12:05 am 56.alex said …

    go strawman, go strawman, 3, 4. gangnam, theist style. cue ass/martin/40year….

  57. on 15 Aug 2013 at 4:19 am 57.Anonymous said …

    Let’s review… 446 comments later, not a single theist has presented any justification for belief in prayer, any evidence to suggest prayer actually has any effect, any explanation of how prayer fits into the definition of an omniscient god with perfect foreknowledge of what actually will occur, any attempt to reconcile the idea of asking god to change something when god already has a plan that is perfect and must unfold exactly as he has already determined, and absolutely no evidence whatsoever that anything remotely like a god actually exists.
    So, atheists 446, theists 0.
    About the only thing we have actually heard in the way of an argument for god is the tired and discredited “you can’t explain how the first molecule of DNA formed” and the resulting false conclusion that “therefore there must have been a magical god that did it…”
    This dead horse has been beaten far too long…

    Right, but this is never going to change if people keep allowing themselves to be drawn into Horatio’s tired old diversions.

    Every new topic he does the same thing. And every topic gets derailed because there’s always someone daft enough to get roped into his dead-end conversations.

    Sorry, folks, but Hor is just one person. That fact that he consistently destroys every and any conversation here is simply because people let him.

  58. on 15 Aug 2013 at 8:06 am 58.Angus and Alexis said …

    “That fact that he consistently destroys every and any conversation here is simply because people let him.”

    What do you propose?

  59. on 15 Aug 2013 at 10:20 am 59.freddies_dead said …

    452.Anonymous said …

    Right, but this is never going to change if people keep allowing themselves to be drawn into Horatio’s tired old diversions.

    This is never going to change because the theists have no evidence for their God. Every topic demonstrates this as they resort to every diversionary tactic they can think of. I’m quite happy with that.

    Every new topic he does the same thing. And every topic gets derailed because there’s always someone daft enough to get roped into his dead-end conversations.

    You say this as if you think we don’t realise what Horatio is doing. On the contrary, we’re acutely aware that he has no evidence for his God and so has no option but to try and derail the conversation. I’m happy to let him do this as it shows to any casual observer that he simply has no answer; he has no evidence. He’s grasping at straws to support his absurd worldview and doing an incredibly poor job of it. His attempts at sockpuppetry to try and pretend he’s winning the battle are just hilarious, lying for Jesus moments. I suspect most theists are embarrassed to be associated with such a fool but they’re similarly bereft of evidence so can’t step in to try and save him from himself.

    Sorry, folks, but Hor is just one person. That fact that he consistently destroys every and any conversation here is simply because people let him.

    He’s not really destroying any conversation. The chance is there for any theist to provide some evidence but they invariably don’t because they don’t have any. Every topic would die on it’s arse after only a few comments if we didn’t have a bit of fun exposing Hor for the lying idiot that he undoubtedly is.

  60. on 15 Aug 2013 at 10:37 am 60.Angus and Alexis said …

    Freddie said
    *Snip*

    I must agree, while if there were more theists here, we would ignore “A” and his army of puppets, the fact that there are none allows us to poke his stupid arguments…

  61. on 15 Aug 2013 at 1:28 pm 61.Anonymous said …

    I agree with both of you. However, freddies_dead addresses it by pointing out that Hor is resorting to a diversion.

    Never mind A. We all know you’re incapable of giving us evidence for your God so we can go back to what you do so badly i.e. you avoiding questions while throwing out irrelevant diversions about evolution and answering yourself with whichever sock-puppet you think is best.

    When people respond to his taunts we are letting him control the conversation, That is where it goes south.

    He has no interest in the answers to the questions on evolution, for example. The sole purpose of those questions is to set people up for another off-topic question, then another question, then another, then another, then another, then another and so on – at that point there is nothing for any theist to answer. Remember, he has no interest in the answers – he just wants to change the subject.

    What do I propose? Don’t answer his questions. They are off-topic and they are not relevant to the topic. Push him to answer – he won’t, of course. Yes, he’ll bluster and come back with lies, taunts, and strawman arguments – that’s where freddies_dead spot-on observation comes in.

  62. on 15 Aug 2013 at 2:12 pm 62.Angus and Alexis said …

    “What do I propose? Don’t answer his questions. They are off-topic and they are not relevant to the topic. Push him to answer – he won’t, of course. Yes, he’ll bluster and come back with lies, taunts, and strawman arguments – that’s where freddies_dead spot-on observation comes in.”

    But i mean is, sure, we can ignore him.
    But without any activity going on here via a theist, who are we going to humiliate? Who are we going to completely devastate in a debate?
    We can’t debate with ourselves surely, so who?

  63. on 15 Aug 2013 at 4:29 pm 63.Anonymous said …

    But he’s not being humiliated, is he?

    He simply challenges people to address his off-topic strawman arguments. When the conversation doesn’t go his way, he throws in another diversion. He never responds to comments or engages in the debate. It’s a one-way street as far as he is concerned.

    As for theists – why would they come here when the sole topic of conversation these days is the origin of DNA?

  64. on 15 Aug 2013 at 8:40 pm 64.A said …

    “who are we going to humiliate? Who are we going to completely devastate in a debate?”

    lol!!! Hey lets get Alexis!! We could devastate her until she/he/it answers. This is great fun to monitor. All the atheist can talk about is me!!! I am so humbled by it all.

    Summary: Atheist still have zero understanding concerning the nature of evidence.

    Note: Speaking with a professor at Univ Arizona this week, he admitted no observational evidence for Macro exists and that faith is required. Progres….

  65. on 15 Aug 2013 at 10:19 pm 65.alex said …

    460.A said …

    yay! welcome back, dipshit/horatio/40year/martin/asshole.

    “Atheist still have zero understanding concerning the nature of evidence.”

    list your standard(s), you fuckhead. we’ll apply it. evolution vs genesis. young earth versus old earth. god vs the volcano.

    “he admitted no observational evidence for Macro exists”

    straw motherfucking #125. now go fuck yourself.

  66. on 16 Aug 2013 at 2:14 am 66.Angus and Alexis. said …

    “lol!!! Hey lets get Alexis!! We could devastate her until she/he/it answers.”

    First off, Alexis is female.

    Secondly, she is an atheist…

    Although, i agree with alex, show your standards, we will beat it anyway…

  67. on 16 Aug 2013 at 2:18 am 67.Angus and Alexis. said …

    Reposted this…
    “Why would an all loving being “God” make people live an eternity of pain and suffering simply because they didn’t want to believe in him?
    Now tell us how you came to choose YOUR flavor of Christianity over all the others?
    Do you agree with messy that hell is NOT eternal?
    Do you agree with him that atheists can go to heaven as long as they are good?
    Do you think women should be ordained into the priesthood?
    Is using birth control a sin?
    Does Jesus cry when you masturbate?
    Is divorce ok with god, or forbidden?
    Why there are so many variants of Christianity? … Are those other christians brainwashed into joining a church/paying a tithe ?
    Is it ok to go to a doctor when you are sick, or should you have faith that Jesus will make you better?
    Is it ok to be gay?
    Why are there 41,000 different denominations of the supposedly one true religion”
    Care to answer these A?
    (times A has failed to answer this off the top of my head, 9 times)

  68. on 16 Aug 2013 at 2:41 am 68.A said …

    “list your standard”

    Sure, for the 50th time. Science must meet the scientific method. We will then analyze if your belief is based on actual facts/evidence or faith.

    “First off, Alexis is female.”

    The word she implies female Agnus. BTW, how do you know she is female? How do you know she is gullible enough to be atheist? Lol!!

  69. on 16 Aug 2013 at 4:23 am 69.Anonymous said …

    You missed these questions, “a”. Let’s get these answered first.

    “Why would an all loving being “God” make people live an eternity of pain and suffering simply because they didn’t want to believe in him?
    Now tell us how you came to choose YOUR flavor of Christianity over all the others?
    Do you agree with messy that hell is NOT eternal?
    Do you agree with him that atheists can go to heaven as long as they are good?
    Do you think women should be ordained into the priesthood?
    Is using birth control a sin?
    Does Jesus cry when you masturbate?
    Is divorce ok with god, or forbidden?
    Why there are so many variants of Christianity? … Are those other christians brainwashed into joining a church/paying a tithe ?
    Is it ok to go to a doctor when you are sick, or should you have faith that Jesus will make you better?
    Is it ok to be gay?
    Why are there 41,000 different denominations of the supposedly one true religion”
    Care to answer these A?
    (times A has failed to answer this off the top of my head, 10 times)

  70. on 16 Aug 2013 at 6:13 am 70.Angus and Alexis. said …

    “The word she implies female Agnus. BTW, how do you know she is female? How do you know she is gullible enough to be atheist? Lol!!”

    Ohh i dont know…
    Maybe because i made her?
    Maybe because she looks exactly like a female character?
    Maybe because i said so?
    Maybe because she is not a complete idiot who believes in sky daddies?

    “. Science must meet the scientific method.”
    Science must meet the scientific method, yes.
    Facts do not, a fact that cannot be “tested” would be something like “Does the earth rotate around the sun?” We know it does, but we cannot test it.

    To anyone who doesnt know the scientific method, it is this.
    Formulation of a question: Is evolution true?
    Hypothesis: I propose that evolution is linked to mutation in DNA.
    Prediction: I believe that if enough mutations occur in a species, it will evolve.
    Testing: (sorry A, but DNA mutations are known to be in tests.)
    Analysis: Given the rate of mutation and known accounts of a speciesation, evolution is proven to be fact.

  71. on 16 Aug 2013 at 9:42 am 71.freddies_dead said …

    463.A said …

    “list your standard”

    Sure, for the 50th time. Science must meet the scientific method.

    You’re going to have to tell us what you mean by “the scientific method” because, when I answered your demand for proof using the scientific method before, you dismissed it without giving any sort of valid reason.

    That makes me think your idea of what the scientific method is, is the same as that of groups such as AiG:

    “By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record.”

    i.e. if you find evidence that doesn’t support your God conclusion, it is the evidence that must be wrong.

    Of course the scientific method used by actual scientists doesn’t work that way. If a hypothesis is falsified by evidence then it is the hypothesis that is discarded not the evidence.

    While you’re working on your definition of the scientific method there’s a few other outstanding questions you can take a bash at:

    “Why would an all loving being “God” make people live an eternity of pain and suffering simply because they didn’t want to believe in him?
    Now tell us how you came to choose YOUR flavor of Christianity over all the others?
    Do you agree with messy that hell is NOT eternal?
    Do you agree with him that atheists can go to heaven as long as they are good?
    Do you think women should be ordained into the priesthood?
    Is using birth control a sin?
    Does Jesus cry when you masturbate?
    Is divorce ok with god, or forbidden?
    Why there are so many variants of Christianity? … Are those other christians brainwashed into joining a church/paying a tithe ?
    Is it ok to go to a doctor when you are sick, or should you have faith that Jesus will make you better?
    Is it ok to be gay?
    Why are there 41,000 different denominations of the supposedly one true religion”

  72. on 16 Aug 2013 at 11:52 am 72.Angus and Alexis said …

    Freddie, you forgot
    “(times A has failed to answer this off the top of my head, 11 times)”

  73. on 16 Aug 2013 at 1:45 pm 73.A said …

    Frederick,

    You don’t even know what the scientific method consist of young blood? There is your problem. Rather pontificating you have provided proof, you need to do a little research on what comprises the very basics of science. I have shared this before too.

    Oh, lol!!!, Agnus or female alex’ little attempt above is not it. lol!! I give her/him/it a break since they obviously know next to nothing about the field.

    Let me try:

    Is evolution true?

    Hypothesis: I propose that evolution is not linked to mutation in DNA.

    Prediction: I believe that if enough mutations occur in a species, it will remain that species
    .
    Testing: (sorry female alex, but DNA mutations are known to be in tests.)

    Analysis: Given the rate of mutation and known accounts of the species remaining as said species, evolution is proven to be false.

  74. on 16 Aug 2013 at 1:50 pm 74.A said …

    Frederick,

    I forgot this one:

    “By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record.”

    How would evolution discredit the existence of God? Ready to believe young blood when you can prove it using evidence.

  75. on 16 Aug 2013 at 2:05 pm 75.alex said …

    “You don’t even know what the scientific method consist of young blood?”

    strawman. you are dismissed, yet again, hor/martin/40year/asstro

    “How would evolution discredit the existence of God?”

    ditto. hor/martin/40year/asstro

  76. on 16 Aug 2013 at 2:15 pm 76.DPK said …

    “How would evolution discredit the existence of God?”

    It wouldn’t… so why are you so obsessed with bringing it up? It is not at all relevant to the topic.
    As has been pointed out to you, there is NOTHING that can disprove the claim of any magical, mythical being… just like you can’t disprove Angus’ Alexis.
    The complete lack of evidence that such a thing actually exists, is reason enough to dismiss it as fantasy unless there is compelling evidence to the contrary… got any?

    Didn’t think so. For what it’s worth, I’ll admit it is within the realm of possibility that Ra the sun god actually could have invented evolution.
    D

  77. on 16 Aug 2013 at 3:11 pm 77.Angus and Alexis said …

    DPK said…
    “As has been pointed out to you, there is NOTHING that can disprove the claim of any magical, mythical being… just like you can’t disprove Angus’ Alexis.”

    Hey, Alexis is neither magical or mythical ;D
    She is a result of the complete simplicity of rewiring my brain.
    Although…i can’t prove her existence either…

    A said…
    “Oh, lol!!!, Agnus or female alex’ little attempt above is not it. lol!! I give her/him/it a break since they obviously know next to nothing about the field.”

    Wow, you dont know what the scientific method is?
    Heck, all you need to do is read one damned page on wikipedia…

    “Is evolution true?”

    Good, you made a question, part one of the method, lets see how it goes.

    “Hypothesis: I propose that evolution is not linked to mutation in DNA.”

    Good, you made a hypothesis, although, it conflicts with the very meaning of evolution.

    “Prediction: I believe that if enough mutations occur in a species, it will remain that species”

    Nice, you made a prediction, but is flawed, as mutations are known to make new species.

    “Testing: (sorry female alex, but DNA mutations are known to be in tests.)”

    My name is Angus (or otherwise “Angus and Alexis”) , please give some respect.
    Secondly, your testing phase is invalid, the DNA mutations observed would have shown how a creature can evolve over enough generations.

    “Analysis: Given the rate of mutation and known accounts of the species remaining as said species, evolution is proven to be false.”

    Again, the shown evidence of mutations and accounts of a species splitting would show that evolution is indeed true.

    “How would evolution discredit the existence of God?”

    It doesn’t, it discredits the story of creation in the bible, if god said he made everything in seven days, and is proven otherwise, it disproves that god.

  78. on 16 Aug 2013 at 3:20 pm 78.Angus and Alexis said …

    Im going to compile what i know about “A”…

    Knows nothing about biology.
    Doesn’t understand the conservation of energy.
    Believes in rib women, talking snakes, magic and a sky daddy.
    Thinks he is an astrophysicist.
    Thinks that evolution has no facts in it.
    Believes the bible is true.
    Believes all morals are from the bible.
    Thinks the theory of evolution is the explanation of the origin of life.
    Uses sock puppets.
    Has the grammar of a six year old.
    Has a form of OCD where he cannot spell anyones name correctly.
    Thinks that disproving ToE makes god a valid substitute.
    Doesn’t understand the scientific method.
    Demands everyone to disprove things.
    Is incapable of proving anything.
    Is incapable of listing any unbiased sources that are valid to the topic.
    Has a evolution fetish.

    Can anyone add anymore?

  79. on 16 Aug 2013 at 3:47 pm 79.DPK said …

    “Can anyone add anymore?”

    Uh… he’s a fucking asshole?

  80. on 16 Aug 2013 at 4:04 pm 80.A said …

    DPK,

    Yeah, Agnus just rewired his/her brain to make a sentient tulip.

    lol!!

    Besides, he/she went to wiki to find out what the scientific method includes.

    lol!! You are priceless Agnus or Alexis or Butterfly, whatever you are.

    Oh, one more time. The ToE discussion is relevant to show atheist do utilize faith, not science, in their belief system. Also to show their lack of understanding in the nature or evidence. Your holy grail, evolution proves that fact.

  81. on 16 Aug 2013 at 5:27 pm 81.alex said …

    “…in their belief system”

    wrong and dismissed as usual. hor/martin/sock1…

    can you see the pattern? we’re tired of your crap. no more nazarene crap. no more “bless you crap”. no more crapping on this site… and on…

  82. on 16 Aug 2013 at 5:44 pm 82.Anonymous said …

    Oh, one more time. The ToE discussion is relevant to show atheist do utilize faith, not science, in their belief system. Also to show their lack of understanding in the nature or evidence. Your holy grail, evolution proves that fact.

    And there you have it. Straight from the horses asses mouth. His reason for being here is to pursue a personal agenda. Even if his ramblings were true, they are still absolutely nothing to do with the purpose of this blog.

    WhyWontGodHealAmputees is a web site that explores the existence of God. This blog accompanies the site and explores God and religion in our world today. For more information:

    Assman is the crazy person you see on street-corners desperate to buttonhole people into a conversation. He exists only to spread his hatred and fear. Every conversation here he sees as validation of his irrational beliefs.

    He has just demonstrated, again, that he has no intention at all of taking part in any debate on this site. He’s ignored, again, all the questions that have been asked of him.

    He’s not going to answer any questions. Ever. He wants only to pursue his agenda and nothing else.

    You don’t deal with the crazy person on the street corner by taking part in their delusion. Arguing with Assman and his many sock-puppets just gives him reason to continue to hate. He doesn’t need airtime, he needs help and the best way we can help him, is to ignore him.

  83. on 16 Aug 2013 at 7:32 pm 83.DPK said …

    Nope.. epic fail again ass… for the sake of argument, the validity of evolution has been ceded here many time over. You seem to be under the mistaken belief that if you don’t accept evolution, you must therefore accept the existence of supernatural gods.
    That is no different from saying if you don’t believe in gravity, you must therefore like spinach.

    Got any proof your silly imaginary god exists other than your crazy ass insane belief that all the species on the earth just magically appeared one day?

  84. on 16 Aug 2013 at 9:37 pm 84.alex said …

    “He doesn’t need airtime, he needs help and the best way we can help him, is to ignore him.”

    like the idiot that bothers me at the park and the bible dickheads that continually knock on my door, martinass deserves total contempt. ignoring him might be best, but silence just feels like in agreement?

    fuck him if he needs help. there are more deserving.

  85. on 16 Aug 2013 at 10:27 pm 85.A said …

    “if you don’t accept evolution, you must therefore accept the existence of supernatural gods.”

    Can you show me the quote? Actually that has been your claim because of your fear there might be a deity. Evolution in no way impacts the existence of a deity.

    You accept evolution on faith and that rattles your worldview. Tough to swallow, huh?

    Agnus,

    I for one would like to know hoe one rewires their brain to produce another being. That sounds quite fascinating and may be evidence for evolution.

  86. on 16 Aug 2013 at 10:32 pm 86.alex said …

    “Can you show me the quote?”

    how about “shut the fuck up, asshole”. your privileges have been revoked. go pray. make sure you tell your foreskin god who you are, martinass.

  87. on 17 Aug 2013 at 12:08 am 87.alex said …

    martinass hornandass, george lopez’s delusional brother. locked up in his basement with a laptop and internet. nothing to do cept fuck with this blog.

    ass/martin/hor/40year outted again. what? no ocean swim?

  88. on 17 Aug 2013 at 12:50 am 88.DPK said …

    ” Evolution in no way impacts the existence of a deity.”

    Show me where anyone here ever claimed that it did. Why must you construct endless straw men to fight against. What has been said here… many times… is there is no evidence that your god exists. Do you actually have any, or will you insist on arguing about something you just admitted has no bearing on the point?

    “You accept evolution on faith and that rattles your worldview. Tough to swallow, huh?”

    So, ass’s point is that if you cannot observe speciation occurring, it isn’t science….?
    Excuse me a minute….

    hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
    wait…
    hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha…

    Did they teach you that in Astrophysics school?
    Go ask for your money back.

  89. on 17 Aug 2013 at 2:09 am 89.Angus and Alexis said …

    A said.
    “Agnus,
    I for one would like to know hoe one rewires their brain to produce another being. That sounds quite fascinating and may be evidence for evolution.”

    Err, no, i cannot link evolution to tulpae, that makes no sense…

    Anyway, if you want to know more, just google it…

    And please start typing peoples names correctly, you look like you didn’t pass third grade english class….

    “You accept evolution on faith and that rattles your worldview.”

    No, we accept it as fact.

    “Evolution in no way impacts the existence of a deity.”

    Yes, it does.
    Deity (Well, most of them)= Made every modern species including humans in one day about ten thousand years ago, with magic.

    Evolution= Explains that one celled creatures became modern species and that it took a shit ton of time, billion years or something.

  90. on 17 Aug 2013 at 4:23 am 90.DPK said …

    Have to disagree. If there was a creator god, far more likely that he started the process of evolution than that he created everything in 6 days and then on the 7th day planted an overwhelming amount of fake evidence in order to think that he didn’t.

    I notice ass how now retreated to the far more nebulous term of “deity” instead of the biblical term of “god”. Seems he is running out of places to move the goalposts, and seems to be claiming evolution now as the idea of his “deity”. Funny how that goes huh? When some future Nobel Prize winner demonstrates how the origins of life was created from organic compounds, you can bet that ass and is ilk will be saying, “but you can’t explain how the atoms that make up those organic molecules were formed… God must have did that!”
    They are so predictable it’s tragic.

  91. on 17 Aug 2013 at 6:03 am 91.Angus and Alexis said …

    DPK said…
    “If there was a creator god, far more likely that he started the process of evolution than that he created everything in 6 days and then on the 7th day planted an overwhelming amount of fake evidence in order to think that he didn’t.”

    If there was a “creator god” it would not make any sense. Nothing can simply “make” the universe, it doesn’t even work in the laws of physics and matter conservation…
    Gods just “Don’t work”…
    You can only make it make sense if you include “Magic”…

  92. on 17 Aug 2013 at 6:52 am 92.Anonymous said …

    Well, of course. The story in Genesis is just one of the things in the Bible that has needed to be “reinterpreted” since we are no longer uneducated, mostly-illiterate, bronze-age nomads.

    That the uneducated, mostly-illiterate, bronze-age nomads quite likely based their story on the earlier myths of even more uneducated tribes only adds to the embarrassment of modern-day people who believe that, how-you-say, shit?

    Unfortunately, substituting a god, no matter where in the process, brings us to the problem that no-one has produced any evidence that such a thing has ever existed.

  93. on 17 Aug 2013 at 7:22 am 93.Angus and Alexis said …

    Agreed…No evidence so far.

  94. on 17 Aug 2013 at 8:16 am 94.Anonymous said …

    “So far”… and thus the theist clings to their life-raft that perhaps, one-day, when pigs fly, and Alexis posts for herself, that proof will be found.

    But wait! Didn’t this god previously walk amongst men? Didn’t he once pop down, give the virgin Mary a bloody good shagging, and pop out as himself? Wasn’t there a time when miracles were de rigueur? When animals talked, bushes burned, loafs of bread were never ending, the sick were healed, and all you needed was faith?

    Yes, but that was then and now that we have recording devices, miracles are suddenly in short supply. Who could have possibly known that the supposed supreme being would turn out to be camera shy? Who knew?

  95. on 17 Aug 2013 at 12:42 pm 95.Xenon said …

    “Nothing can simply “make” the universe, it doesn’t even work in the laws of physics and matter conservation…”

    But according to modern science wasn’t it nothing that did create the universe?

  96. on 17 Aug 2013 at 3:01 pm 96.DPK said …

    “But according to modern science wasn’t it nothing that did create the universe?”

    A common misconception among trolls and sock puppets.

    Modern physics would seem to suggest that what has been thought of as “nothing” is in fact “something”. The quantum field permeates what we would think of as “empty space” and particles are shown to appear and disappear spontaneously. Quite possible that the idea of nothingness as we have thought of it before simply does not exist.

    Got any proof your god did it, or that such a being even exists? Unless you do, no one is interested in your ignorant superstitions… except perhaps, other you.

  97. on 17 Aug 2013 at 3:11 pm 97.Angus and Alexis said …

    Some unknown Anon said…
    ““So far”… and thus the theist clings to their life-raft that perhaps, one-day, when pigs fly, and Alexis posts for herself, that proof will be found.”

    Umm…mate….i’m an atheist…
    Although, one day, i do hope Alexis posts for herself ;D

    A, er….Stan…wait, thats not it….Xenon said…
    “But according to modern science wasn’t it nothing that did create the universe?”

    Yes, science says such.

    But in all honestly, no one, not even the smartest guy on earth, can know for fact how the universe began.
    Not a single atheist, theist, tulpa or anything can or will know how it began, that is the truth.
    We can only guess judged on known evidence.

  98. on 17 Aug 2013 at 4:48 pm 98.A said …

    “Modern physics would seem to suggest that what has been thought of as “nothing” is in fact “something”.”

    ROTFL!!!! The good Dr Krauss who has decided to redefine nothing to be something and has been criticized by many for his lame attempt. Of course, Dippy buys it hook line and sinker. Not surprised, he is a atheist of great faith.

    For our readers, this is the same Krauss who was smoked in a debate at NC State by Craig. Not to mention, all of Krauss’ work is biased toward disproving a deity. Funny stuff Dippy.

    “Although, one day, i do hope Alexis posts for herself”

    Uh, um, yeah Agnus/female alex. You keep us apprised of that process there……….

    Now this in the funniest of all:

    “If there was a “creator god” it would not make any sense. Nothing can simply “make” the universe, it doesn’t even work in the laws of physics and matter conservation…”

    Agnus/female alex what????? Nothing except nature right tulip? So please, share, how could a universe come about by NOT violating these laws especially “matter conservation”?

    I’m getting the popcorn for this one!!!!!!!

  99. on 17 Aug 2013 at 5:22 pm 99.Anonymous said …

    Umm…mate….i’m an atheist…
    Although, one day, i do hope Alexis posts for herself ;D

    I know, and you should know that I know that you know.

    But, yes, it did kind of come over a little jumbled. My mistake, I was remarking on the desperation of theists to cling to any shred of hope, no matter how bizarre.

    “But according to modern science wasn’t it nothing that did create the universe?”

    A common misconception among trolls and sock puppets.

    Excellent, you win the internets for the entire day.

    Now back to the purpose of this blog, and the questions that “A” is dodging:

    “Why would an all loving being “God” make people live an eternity of pain and suffering simply because they didn’t want to believe in him?
    Now tell us how you came to choose YOUR flavor of Christianity over all the others?
    Do you agree with messy that hell is NOT eternal?
    Do you agree with him that atheists can go to heaven as long as they are good?
    Do you think women should be ordained into the priesthood?
    Is using birth control a sin?
    Does Jesus cry when you masturbate?
    Is divorce ok with god, or forbidden?
    Why there are so many variants of Christianity? … Are those other christians brainwashed into joining a church/paying a tithe ?
    Is it ok to go to a doctor when you are sick, or should you have faith that Jesus will make you better?
    Is it ok to be gay?
    Why are there 41,000 different denominations of the supposedly one true religion”

    (times A has failed to answer these – at least 12 times)

  100. on 17 Aug 2013 at 6:32 pm 100.Angus and Alexis said …

    A said.
    “So please, share, how could a universe come about by NOT violating these laws especially “matter conservation”?”

    Maybe there was matter all along?
    Maybe there was indeed a law breaking event?

    My time machine is not working, so i cannot tell you what happened 40 billion years ago, sorry.

    “Uh, um, yeah Agnus/female alex. You keep us apprised of that process there……….”

    I plan on doing so.

    “I’m getting the popcorn for this one!!!!!!!”

    I would advise a drink and a new pair of pants as well.

    Anon said.
    “I know, and you should know that I know that you know.”

    You kinda typed it in a rather aggressive manner.

    ““Why would an all loving being “God” make people live an eternity of pain and suffering simply because they didn’t want to believe in him?
    Now tell us how you came to choose YOUR flavor of Christianity over all the others?
    Do you agree with messy that hell is NOT eternal?
    Do you agree with him that atheists can go to heaven as long as they are good?
    Do you think women should be ordained into the priesthood?
    Is using birth control a sin?
    Does Jesus cry when you masturbate?
    Is divorce ok with god, or forbidden?
    Why there are so many variants of Christianity? … Are those other christians brainwashed into joining a church/paying a tithe ?
    Is it ok to go to a doctor when you are sick, or should you have faith that Jesus will make you better?
    Is it ok to be gay?
    Why are there 41,000 different denominations of the supposedly one true religion”
    (times A has failed to answer these – at least 12 times)”

    i made that damned list, and he still hasn’t answered it XD

  101. on 17 Aug 2013 at 6:37 pm 101.Angus and Alexis said …

    *(times A has failed to answer these – at least 13 times)”

    Fixed…

  102. on 17 Aug 2013 at 6:59 pm 102.Anonymous said …

    You kinda typed it in a rather aggressive manner.

    That was certainly not my intention, at least not in your direction. An apology and a tube of Fosters are yours.

  103. on 17 Aug 2013 at 7:15 pm 103.A said …

    “Maybe there was indeed a law breaking event?”

    Tulip!, you just said that wasn’t possible and now you have stated maybe laws may have been broken? Is it possible a deity was involved? Laws were broken and who made the laws so they could be broken? Why dies an atheist have this much faith?

    Now Tulip you and Mousey need to make up. Make sure Mouse follows through. :)

  104. on 17 Aug 2013 at 7:28 pm 104.DPK said …

    Would that be the same “Craig” who has been busted repeatedly for telling flat out lies and falsehoods… and deliberating misrepresenting facts, over and over, and over?
    vs “this” Krauss?
    Krauss is one of the few living physicists referred to by Scientific American as a “public intellectual”,and he is the only physicist to have received awards from all three major U.S. physics societies: the American Physical Society, the American Association of Physics Teachers, and the American Institute of Physics. In 2012 he was awarded the National Science Board’s Public Service Medal for his contributions to public education in science and engineering in the US.

    During December 2011, Krauss was named as a non-voting honorary board member for the Center for Inquiry.[12]

    That’s your answer to dismiss the entirety of modern quantum physics huh? William Lane Craig. Ok. Par for the course I suppose. Who’s next, Jim Baker?
    hahahahaha

  105. on 17 Aug 2013 at 8:05 pm 105.Anonymous said …

    Yes, DPK, it would be that Craig because in “A”s world of the troll, he needs to claim that a philosopher of religion would be more knowledgeable in theoretical physics and cosmology than an actual theoretical physicist and cosmologist.

    It’s also the same Craig who is more than OK with his supposed god committing genocide and killing children. It’s hard to conceive that someone would willingly praise another for the mass murder of children, but in the Christian world, “A”s world, that’s A-OK.

    In Craig’s words:

    “But why take the lives of innocent children? The terrible totality of the destruction was undoubtedly related to the prohibition of assimilation to pagan nations on Israel’s part. In commanding complete destruction of the Canaanites, the Lord says, ‘You shall not intermarry with them, giving your daughters to their sons, or taking their daughters for your sons, for they would turn away your sons from following me, to serve other gods’ (Deut 7.3-4). […] God knew that if these Canaanite children were allowed to live, they would spell the undoing of Israel. […] Moreover, if we believe, as I do, that God’s grace is extended to those who die in infancy or as small children, the death of these children was actually their salvation. We are so wedded to an earthly, naturalistic perspective that we forget that those who die are happy to quit this earth for heaven’s incomparable joy. Therefore, God does these children no wrong in taking their lives.”

    At least he didn’t try to argue that killing children was a metaphor for sending them to bed without their supper.

  106. on 17 Aug 2013 at 8:23 pm 106.A said …

    “philosopher of religion would be more knowledgeable in theoretical physics and cosmology than an actual theoretical physicist and cosmologist.”

    ROTFL!!! Again!!! No, Craig is more knowledgeable in presenting a case for God of which Krauss had no discernable rebuttal. In physics, Krauss is great until he redefines something as nothings in order to satisfy his bias against God.

    Nice try boys to twist my words. Liars always remain liars unfortunately, especially atheists lol!!!

  107. on 17 Aug 2013 at 10:16 pm 107.Anonymous said …

    Let’s have your answer to these then, “A”. That way you can’t accuse people of twisting your words.

    “Why would an all loving being “God” make people live an eternity of pain and suffering simply because they didn’t want to believe in him?
    Now tell us how you came to choose YOUR flavor of Christianity over all the others?
    Do you agree with messy that hell is NOT eternal?
    Do you agree with him that atheists can go to heaven as long as they are good?
    Do you think women should be ordained into the priesthood?
    Is using birth control a sin?
    Does Jesus cry when you masturbate?
    Is divorce ok with god, or forbidden?
    Why there are so many variants of Christianity? … Are those other christians brainwashed into joining a church/paying a tithe ?
    Is it ok to go to a doctor when you are sick, or should you have faith that Jesus will make you better?
    Is it ok to be gay?
    Why are there 41,000 different denominations of the supposedly one true religion”
    (times A has failed to answer these – at least 13 times)

  108. on 18 Aug 2013 at 2:05 am 108.Angus and Alexis said …

    Ahem, its now 14 times…

  109. on 18 Aug 2013 at 2:20 am 109.Angus and Alexis said …

    The Anon said.
    “That was certainly not my intention, at least not in your direction. An apology and a tube of Fosters are yours.”

    Alcohol?
    What do you think i am?
    An Aussie?….Wait…i am one…

    Ohh well, i prefer chocolate and milkshakes…alcohol is just a nasty toxic liquid people drink to get drunk on…

    A said…
    “Tulip!, you just said that wasn’t possible and now you have stated maybe laws may have been broken?”

    You see A, when you use maybe, it means you are not sure, all current knowledge says nothing cannot become something, until someone proves otherwise, the chances of such are non existent.

    “Is it possible a deity was involved?”

    What we know, is that the christian, islamic, hindu and every other religion’s god was not involved.

    “Laws were broken and who made the laws so they could be broken?”

    How do you know that “Laws were broken”?
    If you have a functional time machine, i would like to know how you got it (joke, of course..).

    “Why dies an atheist have this much faith?”

    Atheist: a person who rejects the possibility of a God.

    Hmm, lets see… Where is this faith? We know that deities do not exist.

  110. on 18 Aug 2013 at 4:27 pm 110.Scourge said …

    Someone mentioned a debate at NC State of Craig versus Krauss where Craig supposedly wins. I watched over an hour of that and could not bear listening to the ultra-sleazy Craig for another hour. Craig is a buffoon. He would be comical were it not for Hydra of grotesqueries embodied in his speech patterns and physical person. His attempt to appear rigorous by putting up a couple slides with probability notation is purely for the benefit of the poor intellectually hobbled souls who are inclined to believe him anyway. If he actually understood what he was doing, or was honest, he would have defined the priors in detail. Never does he discuss what would be evidence for God. It is all “God of the Gaps” nonsense as in the universe having a beginning is evidence for a God. This is the ultimate God of the Gaps argument. His arguments for fine tuning, physical constants with high degrees of precision (or misinterpreted as in the case of entropy) either are another example of his chicanery or sad ignorance. I suspect measures of both. Also, Craig repeatedly misrepresents what Krauss said.

    Admittedly, Krauss is at times bumbling, but at least he is honest and not a huckster like Craig. He tells the truth.

    The bigger question is who are the people who can find nauseating people like Craig and the rubbish on American Family Radio tolerable let alone worthwhile.

    Finally, as a clear testament to the depravity of Craig, he has the Craig Krauss debate on his own website! That is amazing.

  111. on 18 Aug 2013 at 4:36 pm 111.Scourge said …

    Folks on this site should be reading “Zealot: The life and times of Jesus of Nazareth” by reformed evangelical Christian Reza Aslan. It is a great read and puts the nuttiness of the degenerate Judaism which became Christianity into social, historical, and political perspective. Again I am astounded at how Christians fail or refuse to understand and acknowledge the Earthly origins of their hoped-for divinely inspired beliefs. It is sad but true.

    Evangelicals and Fundamentalists please follow the lead of your Main Line betters. Give up the nonsense. Please! Give up the nonsense or crawl back under your rocks where you lived before Jimmy Carter legitimized snake handling, jabbering and squawking Christianity.

  112. on 18 Aug 2013 at 7:14 pm 112.A said …

    Readers,

    You may find this shocking. A new zealot atheist finds a theist who betters his hero, a fellow atheist as obnoxious and wrong. Who would of thunk it? It further infuriates Scourge that Craig would post the debate on his website. Lol!, yes we know an atheist would never do the same.

    It is a known fact that atheist like PZ Myers and Richard Dawkins are the nastiest and most obnoxious personalities on the web. Check them out for proof. Those like Scourge cannot stomach his own being annihilated in the arena of ideas and reason.

  113. on 18 Aug 2013 at 8:00 pm 113.teenager said …

    As you can see I’m a teenager one with sense
    Alex please stop swearing the rest of you
    God has a plan things happen for a reason dont expect him to give
    You what u want its what you need what he thinks
    You need ok good contin

  114. on 18 Aug 2013 at 9:26 pm 114.DPK said …

    So, when he gives a child brain cancer or leukemia, it’s what they need?
    Really? You think you have sense?
    Please.

  115. on 18 Aug 2013 at 9:28 pm 115.DPK said …

    ” A new zealot atheist finds a theist who betters his hero, a fellow atheist as obnoxious and wrong.”

    Watched the video… must have missed that part. Can you post the timecode where you think this happens?

    D

  116. on 19 Aug 2013 at 12:11 am 116.Angus and Alexis. said …

    “As you can see I’m a teenager one with sense”

    Keep trying kiddo, maybe add some full stops too.

    “Alex please stop swearing the rest of you”

    No, also, nice sentence construction you have there.

    “God has a plan things happen for a reason dont expect him to give”

    He has omnipotence, the biggest task is nothing for him, i would expect him to feed the damned world for starters.

    “You what u want its what you need what he thinks”

    Wow, i could barely comprehend what you were trying to state there.
    So kids need strokes, cancer, HIV, starving, poverty, and in general premature death? Nice god you have there.

    “You need ok good contin”

    No seriously, what the heck does this sentence even mean?

  117. on 19 Aug 2013 at 1:01 am 117.Anonymous said …

    The drive-by teenager, almost certainly not coming back, so why we [including me] are wasting time on him is questionable.

    What I think he was trying to say was:

    As you can see I’m a teenager, one with sense.

    Alex, please stop swearing.

    [As for] the rest of you, God has a plan.

    [T]hings happen for a reason. [D]on’t expect him to give [y]ou what u want. [I]t’s [not] what you [think you] need, [it’s] what he thinks [y]ou need [that he gives you].

    ok[?] [G]ood.

    [C]ontin[ue],/i>

  118. on 19 Aug 2013 at 1:32 am 118.Scourge said …

    #512 Craig betters Krauss? Huh?

  119. on 19 Aug 2013 at 2:00 am 119.Anonymous said …

    Scourge, don’t forget that “A” is a troll and his tactics here are to goad people into diversionary arguments. Lies, falsehoods, strawmen, red herrings, he doesn’t care what he posts as long as he can get someone to take the bait. He’ll then sit back and pump insults, taunts, and irrelevant questions into the mix in order to keep his diversion alive.

    He does so in order to draw attention away from the blog posts, the questions he won’t answer (which is, practically any question), and from his inability and refusal to provide evidence for the existence of his imaginary friend.

  120. on 19 Aug 2013 at 3:03 am 120.Edward said …

    Evolution is imaginary. It was imagined about 150 years ago. We can never really know, with the certainty of now, how it all happened. We can’t go back in time to verify. Ultimately, we have to believe.

  121. on 19 Aug 2013 at 4:23 am 121.Anonymous said …

    Imagine, for a moment, a Xtian forum where they are discussing the latest “scholarly research”. The subject being the actual words the taking snake used to convince the woman made from a rib, to sweet-talk the man made from dust, into eating a particular piece of fruit, all so that his god could hold everyone responsible, for eternity, as the god had planned all along.

    Now, in the midst of this earnest debate, along comes a troll who interjects “well, the hieroglyphics at Karnak prove the truth of Atum the creator”. You guyz just making up shit.

    Who here thinks that the Christians are going to break off from their deliberations and take on the deliberate attempt at disruption? Or, are they going to tell the twat to f-off then ignore him?

    Yet, somehow the trolls here think that every time they get in a hole, they can bring in a new character to make the same, tired, assertions. I certainly hope it doesn’t turn out that we are as, or more stupid, than the Christians!

  122. on 19 Aug 2013 at 11:43 am 122.freddies_dead said …

    473.A said …

    Frederick,

    You don’t even know what the scientific method consist of young blood? There is your problem. Rather pontificating you have provided proof, you need to do a little research on what comprises the very basics of science. I have shared this before too.

    I’m well aware of what the scientific method is, I even answered your demand for an example of evidence for evolution that was found using the scientific method. The fact that you dismissed it without giving a valid reason leads me to conclude that you have a radically different definition than the one actual scientists use. You need to give us this definition if you expect us to consider using your method instead of the standard one.

  123. on 19 Aug 2013 at 11:44 am 123.freddies_dead said …

    474.A said …

    Frederick,

    I forgot this one:

    “By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record.”

    How would evolution discredit the existence of God?

    Who said anything about evolution discrediting the existence of God? We were talking about the scientific method and how your version seems to be more in keeping with AiG’s statement of faith which prohibits them from considering any evidence which contradicts the scriptural record. Evolution demonstrates that the creation story in Genesis is simply a myth which doesn’t fit with scientific fact. This, of course, discredits the Bible, not God. This shouldn’t be a problem if you’ve got evidence for the existence of your God which isn’t simply “God exists because the Bible says God exists and the Bible is the word of God because the Bible says it’s the word of God”. Do you have any such evidence? If so then please present it. If you’ve provided it before then give us a link to the thread/post that you believe contains the evidence so we can consider it.

    Ready to believe young blood when you can prove it using evidence.

    Based on your refusal to accept evidence which proves evolution this appears to be a lie.

    Now back to the purpose of this blog, and the questions that “A” is dodging:

    “Why would an all loving being “God” make people live an eternity of pain and suffering simply because they didn’t want to believe in him?
    Now tell us how you came to choose YOUR flavor of Christianity over all the others?
    Do you agree with messy that hell is NOT eternal?
    Do you agree with him that atheists can go to heaven as long as they are good?
    Do you think women should be ordained into the priesthood?
    Is using birth control a sin?
    Does Jesus cry when you masturbate?
    Is divorce ok with god, or forbidden?
    Why there are so many variants of Christianity? … Are those other christians brainwashed into joining a church/paying a tithe ?
    Is it ok to go to a doctor when you are sick, or should you have faith that Jesus will make you better?
    Is it ok to be gay?
    Why are there 41,000 different denominations of the supposedly one true religion”

    (times A has failed to answer these – at least 14 times)

  124. on 19 Aug 2013 at 11:48 am 124.A said …

    “Craig betters Krauss? Huh?”

    Absolutely. If my recollection is correct, Krauss pretty much agreed. But I didn’t bring up Krauss and his “something is now nothing”, that was DPK.

    Spare me another summation of his argument. I have read it. He simply redefined nothing. Fantastic!

  125. on 19 Aug 2013 at 11:50 am 125.A said …

    “were talking about the scientific method and how your version seems to be more in keeping with AiG’s statement of faith”

    Really? How so? Provide a statement where this holds true.

  126. on 19 Aug 2013 at 12:08 pm 126.freddies_dead said …

    520.Edward said …

    Evolution is imaginary. It was imagined about 150 years ago.

    So allele frequencies in populations don’t change over time? Do you have any evidence to demonstrate this claim? I note that, as Edward is most likely a drive-by who won’t return to read the responses to his mindless claim, I suspect the answer to this question is a resounding “no”.

    We can never really know, with the certainty of now, how it all happened. We can’t go back in time to verify.

    Just like all the claims in the Bible you mean? Of course nature is still evolving, enabling us to see evidence “with the certainty of now”, and it also allows us to extrapolate with a fair degree of certainty as to what happened before.

    Ultimately, we have to believe.

    “Believe what?” is the question of course. Should we believe the idea that has supporting evidence i.e. evolution? Or should we instead mindlessly believe the idea that has absolutely no supporting evidence i.e. God?

    Maybe Edward could help us out where A and his sockpuppets have singularly failed? Can Edward give us some evidence for the existence of his God (assuming he is a believer of course)? Perhaps he could pray for some evidence to show up so we can see the efficacy of prayer while we’re at it?

    I won’t be holding my breath.

  127. on 19 Aug 2013 at 12:11 pm 127.freddies_dead said …

    525.A said …

    “were talking about the scientific method and how your version seems to be more in keeping with AiG’s statement of faith”

    Really?

    Yes, really.

    How so? Provide a statement where this holds true.

    The evidence is on this thread A. Where you dismissed the evidence I gave you as it doesn’t fit in with the conclusion you’ve already come to.

    Now back to the purpose of this blog, and the questions that “A” is dodging:

    “Why would an all loving being “God” make people live an eternity of pain and suffering simply because they didn’t want to believe in him?
    Now tell us how you came to choose YOUR flavor of Christianity over all the others?
    Do you agree with messy that hell is NOT eternal?
    Do you agree with him that atheists can go to heaven as long as they are good?
    Do you think women should be ordained into the priesthood?
    Is using birth control a sin?
    Does Jesus cry when you masturbate?
    Is divorce ok with god, or forbidden?
    Why there are so many variants of Christianity? … Are those other christians brainwashed into joining a church/paying a tithe ?
    Is it ok to go to a doctor when you are sick, or should you have faith that Jesus will make you better?
    Is it ok to be gay?
    Why are there 41,000 different denominations of the supposedly one true religion”

    (times A has failed to answer these – at least 15 times)

  128. on 19 Aug 2013 at 1:44 pm 128.Angus and Alexis. said …

    Yes, my list is still going!

  129. on 19 Aug 2013 at 2:14 pm 129.Edward said …

    When I think of evolution I’m not thinking of species of finches, fruit flies, cichlid fishes, or buttercups, etc. And I’m not thinking of evolution = life is resilient, tenacious, etc. I’m thinking of something much more, something we don’t see in nature or labs at all. I’m thinking of the whole thing, you know, all the way back to whatever it was that all life on earth started from. I’m thinking of the eternity involved that would make the idea even remotely conceivable. That is imaginary. And I’m thinking of something much, much smaller in context than all of that, the real crux of evolution; I’m thinking of apes as descendents of modern man. I’m thinking of that comical illustration of the ‘ascent of man’. That is imaginary.

  130. on 19 Aug 2013 at 2:33 pm 130.DPK said …

    ” But I didn’t bring up Krauss and his “something is now nothing”, that was DPK.”

    No Ass… YOU are the one who brought up Krauss. I did no such thing. I simply asserted the truth that empty space, that which we used to think of as nothing, is IN FACT something. It has properties, it can be warped, it limits the speed at which things can travel through it, and quantum particles have been observed popping in and out of existence in it. Since it has properties, it is obviously not “nothing”. That is not redefining “nothing” it is redefining space.
    What I said is, that in the universe we know, it is entirely possible “nothing” does not exist.
    Rather than address that issue, you brought up Krauss and tried to discredit the argument by bringing up some debate with some discredited, proven liar and windbag in which you perceive he won some debate about theoretical physics. I wonder how much time Craig has logged on the LHC? hahahaha
    Go back to your camper behind the supermarket Stan… no one is buying a word you say.

  131. on 19 Aug 2013 at 2:36 pm 131.DPK said …

    Here is the thing that theists like Stan don’t seem to comprehend. When it comes to an argument between physics and philosophy… physics doesn’t care what your philosophy says must be true.
    The thing about reality is, it’s true whether you believe in it or not.

  132. on 19 Aug 2013 at 3:14 pm 132.freddies_dead said …

    529.Edward said …

    When I think of evolution I’m not thinking of species of finches, fruit flies, cichlid fishes, or buttercups, etc. And I’m not thinking of evolution = life is resilient, tenacious, etc. I’m thinking of something much more, something we don’t see in nature or labs at all.

    So, something we don’t see in nature? OK, so not evolution then.

    I’m thinking of the whole thing, you know, all the way back to whatever it was that all life on earth started from.

    Abiogenesis =/= evolution.

    I’m thinking of the eternity involved that would make the idea even remotely conceivable. That is imaginary.

    Well gods are supposedly eternal … and entirely imaginary. Is it gods you’re thinking about?

    And I’m thinking of something much, much smaller in context than all of that, the real crux of evolution;

    The change in allele frequency in populations over time?

    I’m thinking of apes as descendents of modern man.

    Oh dear. You don’t really have a clue about evolution do you Edward? Apes are descendants of modern men are they?

    Humans are apes … along with chimps, orangutans etc… They are not our descendants. Instead we share a common ancestor.

    I’m thinking of that comical illustration of the ‘ascent of man’.

    Do you have anything to show how that illustration is comical? Unless you mean the one where man winds up sitting behind a computer – that one’s quite obviously humorous.

    That is imaginary.

    The only imaginary thing we can find in this post is your version of evolution. Perhaps you and A could compare notes and see which of you has the most bizarro version of evolutionary theory?

    Also, could you try actually answering the questions asked of you?

    The main one:
    “Can Edward give us some evidence for the existence of his God (assuming he is a believer of course)?”

    And one that has some relevance for this thread:
    “Perhaps he could pray for some evidence to show up so we can see the efficacy of prayer while we’re at it?”

  133. on 19 Aug 2013 at 3:50 pm 133.Edward said …

    Freddie, I made myself clear enough for anyone who really wanted to respond with something meaningful. But it seems you would rather shut down any meaningful discussion with vocabulary corrections, with clever little quips like “OK, so not evolution” or “Oh dear. You don’t really have a clue about evolution do you Edward?” As though attempts at intimidation were signs of intelligence. It’s the bigger picture, Freddie, that matters to me, not the little maze that you want to trap me in.

    You have your religion (science, evolution are part of it), your gods, your creed, your set of beliefs and values, etc. And others have theirs.

    Here’s what you sound like to me.

    “We (who’s house this is) believe that what we believe is more reasonable than what you (whoever you are that don’t believe what we believe) believe. And here is why.”

    So you refer me to your expanded vocabulary and theories of the origin of me, and you want me to accept your beliefs as certain, or certainly more certain than what I believe based on your assertion of evidence you find to be more reasonable than my evidence, or evidence that not just you but others find to be more reasonable than my evidence, too.

    You’re as small and predictable as any poster here, including myself.

  134. on 19 Aug 2013 at 4:01 pm 134.DPK said …

    “…your assertion of evidence you find to be more reasonable than my evidence, or evidence that not just you but others find to be more reasonable than my evidence, too.”

    Um.. hate to point this out Edward, but you haven’t presented any evidence, just a bunch of rambling, disjointed nonsense.

    If you have evidence, we would all be delighted to see it.

  135. on 19 Aug 2013 at 4:11 pm 135.Edward said …

    Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

    DPK, I know what house I’m in.

  136. on 19 Aug 2013 at 4:13 pm 136.Edward said …

    It’s clear that you’re not open to any evidence but your own

  137. on 19 Aug 2013 at 4:14 pm 137.Edward said …

    that’s how small you are

  138. on 19 Aug 2013 at 4:27 pm 138.DPK said …

    I’m open to any evidence you have to offer… you haven’t shown us any.
    Typical.
    Next.

  139. on 19 Aug 2013 at 4:28 pm 139.Edward said …

    Presenting evidence in a place where the results are as predictable as they are here is an excercise in futility. It’s silly, or maybe not, if you enjoy abuse. Have fun.

  140. on 19 Aug 2013 at 4:33 pm 140.Edward said …

    Your sitting there waiting for anyone to say something that you can pounce on. Wow! Surely, the world is a better place because of it.

  141. on 19 Aug 2013 at 4:49 pm 141.DPK said …

    So, what you are saying is that you refuse to present your evidence for god because you already know it won’t stand up to scrutiny? You will only share your evidence with those that think as you do?
    You don’t really understand the concept of “evidence” do you?
    This is a discussion board. If you don’t want to discuss, but only preach, you should not be surprised if you are not well received.
    You are a fraud, and are dismissed.
    D

  142. on 19 Aug 2013 at 4:59 pm 142.Edward said …

    Nice D, like I don’t know what bait looks like. At least you’re funny. Hey, do you know any good “Your Mama” put downs? I mean one’s that I haven’t heard yet. You’re such a nice guy. I feel so out of place!

  143. on 19 Aug 2013 at 5:33 pm 143.DPK said …

    Poor you. You’re persecuted and misunderstood. Boo hoo.

    Ideas presented without evidence can be dismissed without reason. If you come here to preach, but aren’t going to prove your ideas because you already know we won’t believe you… what’s the point?

    Back on topic… do you have any actual evidence that prayer works, or that such a thing as gods actually exist?

  144. on 19 Aug 2013 at 5:55 pm 144.Edward said …

    I note that, as Edward is most likely a drive-by who won’t return to read the responses…

    It’s about time, Freddie. People just don’t have the kind of time you have to put into futility. You’re right. I won’t last.

  145. on 19 Aug 2013 at 6:01 pm 145.DPK said …

    So, that would be a “No”, huh, Edward?

    Typical….

  146. on 19 Aug 2013 at 7:15 pm 146.Edward said …

    Maybe Edward could help us out where A and his sockpuppets have singularly failed? Can Edward give us some evidence for the existence of his God (assuming he is a believer of course)? [hee! hee!] Perhaps he could pray for some evidence to show up so we can see the efficacy of prayer while we’re at it? [hee! hee!]

    Or to Paraphrase:
    Freddie, the ape: (wringing hands) Come children, witness, once again, the baiting and beheading of another one. Oh, joy! Don’t you just love this place? Isn’t this fun?

  147. on 19 Aug 2013 at 7:33 pm 147.alex said …

    “Freddie, the ape: (wringing hands) Come children, witness, once again, the baiting and beheading of another one.”

    wrong, dipshit. paraphrase all you want, but it doesn’t make it so.

    “Oh, joy! Don’t you just love this place?”

    sarcasm is your proof? you weak shit. think you’re clever? you’re just all the rest of the idiots, all talk, but no proof. dismissed, shithead, numero 384.

  148. on 19 Aug 2013 at 7:35 pm 148.A said …

    Edward,

    We are attempting to get the atheist to understand the nature evidence. They refuse to provide proof for evolution using the scientific method while requiring such evidence for God. Keep pushing them for the evidence so that we can set a baseline for evidence.

    tee hee hee, they will not since they know recognize their hypocrisy.

    Now they will perform more diversions claiming we are the same poster. Lol!!

  149. on 19 Aug 2013 at 7:39 pm 149.A said …

    Edward,

    Get the feeling these guys have cheered a great deal as 47 churches In Egypt have been attacked in the last 5 days? Haters are so ugly.

  150. on 19 Aug 2013 at 7:42 pm 150.A said …

    Frederick thinks humans are apes…….well by who he hangs out with, well OK I could see his confusion.

    ROTFL!!!

  151. on 19 Aug 2013 at 7:48 pm 151.alex said …

    “We are attempting to get the atheist to understand the nature evidence.”

    spit it out asshole. list your damn standard and we’ll compare your god against anything else, but you won’t because your god loses every single damn time.

    try it, ass/martin/40year/hor. in case you’ve forgotten who you are.

  152. on 19 Aug 2013 at 8:59 pm 152.Edward said …

    Perhaps someone here who is serious can educate me. Please provide the undeniable, irrefutable evidence that proves, beyond a shadow of doubt, that we did, in fact, arrive here and now from some other animal classification. And allow me to thoroughly examine your evidence.

  153. on 19 Aug 2013 at 10:21 pm 153.DPK said …

    Edward… it is not our job to educate you on the specifics of evolution. There are ample resources available to you to do that… start at talkorigins(dot)org if you want to learn about evolution.
    This is not an evolution blog, this is a blog to talk about god and religion.
    Now if you want to provide evidence that gods in fact exist, and interact with the physical universe in response to prayers… feel free. If you insist on sidetracking the discussion with irrelevant diversions than please go away. No one here goes to ChristianMingle and demands irrefutable evidence that the earth is round.

    Pretty obvious that you are just a troll looking to sidetrack the discussion. If you actually had any evidence for your imaginary god, you would have presented it and shut us all up by now. So what do you do instead? Demand we present you with a thesis on evolutionary biology? I don’t think so.

  154. on 19 Aug 2013 at 10:42 pm 154.A said …

    Edward,

    Notice how DPK claims there is plenty of evidence but yet he fails to produce any? What he is saying it is not his job to show he understands the nature of evidence.

    He like the rest here sets the bar at a higher level for God than they do for ToE. On that they cannot argue.

  155. on 20 Aug 2013 at 12:01 am 155.Angus and Alexis. said …

    Wow, im away for like…ONE day, and some ass hat “edward” comes, claims he doesnt need to prove god, then “A” comes and says we need to prove evolution.

    Fine, whatever, if it makes you happy, Evolution is fake, us EVIL atheists made it up to burn more babiesor something.
    (It is obviously true, but ToE is irrelevant to the blog topic)

    A said
    “Notice how DPK claims there is plenty of evidence but yet he fails to produce any? ”

    Irrelevant.

    “He like the rest here sets the bar at a higher level for God than they do for ToE. On that they cannot argue.”

    See the blog? See how it was made to discuss GOD, not ToE, not llamas, not giant enemy crabs. GOD, so if you come here and post stuff which is not ‘GOD’ related, please stop.

    “Frederick thinks humans are apes…….well by who he hangs out with, well OK I could see his confusion.”

    Bah, i hate these kind of people, they think they are ascended beings or something. Yes, we are apes, so what? That is just the fact, we are still the smartest living thing on earth by far.

    “Get the feeling these guys have cheered a great deal as 47 churches In Egypt have been attacked in the last 5 days? Haters are so ugly.”

    Egypt?
    I dont watch much news, but having christian churches in an islamic area is not very smart.. *wink wink*

    “They refuse to provide proof for evolution using the scientific method while requiring such evidence for God.”

    Actually, if you had an attention span of more than seven hours, you would know that we had posted just what you wanted. Did not stop you from dismissing it because it wasn’t your version of the scientific method though.

    Will be continued for “A”

  156. on 20 Aug 2013 at 12:12 am 156.Angus and Alexis. said …

    Edward, the freshman said.

    “Perhaps someone here who is serious can educate me. Please provide the undeniable, irrefutable evidence that proves, beyond a shadow of doubt, that we did, in fact, arrive here and now from some other animal classification. And allow me to thoroughly examine your evidence.”

    Ohh please, tell us about the talking snakes, rib women, dust men and magic that can and did make the universe via an omnipotent being who killed all but a few of each species about TEN thousand years ago…

    “It’s about time, Freddie. People just don’t have the kind of time you have to put into futility. You’re right. I won’t last.”

    So you are a driveby preacher?
    That allows us to learn so much *sarcasm*.
    Please, tell us more about the slaves and burning of animal flesh.

    “Nice D, like I don’t know what bait looks like. At least you’re funny. Hey, do you know any good “Your Mama” put downs? I mean one’s that I haven’t heard yet. You’re such a nice guy. I feel so out of place!”

    Nice dodge, you know questions are meant to be answered right?

    “Your sitting there waiting for anyone to say something that you can pounce on. Wow! Surely, the world is a better place because of it.”

    Dear god…two dodges?
    TWO? IN A ROW? Come on…

  157. on 20 Aug 2013 at 3:35 am 157.Anonymous said …

    Edward… it is not our job to educate you on the specifics of evolution. There are ample resources available to you to do that… start at talkorigins(dot)org if you want to learn about evolution.
    This is not an evolution blog, this is a blog to talk about god and religion.

    So, you can provide no undeniable, irrefutable evidence that proves, beyond a shadow of a doubt, your own beliefs, eh? You can ask for such proof from others but you cannot provide it yourself. Instead you find a way to sidestep the question. The reason? There is no such proof and you know it.

    BTW, I am talking about your religion.

  158. on 20 Aug 2013 at 3:45 am 158.DPK said …

    Notice how DPK claims there is plenty of evidence but yet he fails to produce any? What he is saying it is not his job to show he understands the nature of evidence.

    No ther IS plenty of evidence that supports evolution. It is simple to find. If you are too lazy to look it up yourself, maybe try a high school biology course.

    Notice how A insist on ignoring any questions relevant to the topic of this blog, god and religion, and instead tries to divert the discussion to some irrelevant topic. Why is that?

    Note too, for the sake of discussion about god and religion, many posters on this blog have repeatedly offered to cede the point that the concept of evolution is somehow completely wrong… So what? Even if tomorrow the idea was completely abandoned by science, how would that have any bearing on the existence of magical gods, or more specifically for this thread, that magical gods intercede in the physical world by answering prayers.

    Why must A try to sidetrack EVERY single topic of discussion to his pre occupation with evolution?

    If he had any actual evidence that his god exists and in fct answers prayers, he would present it and shut everyone the fuck up. But he never doe that, instead, like a prancing pigeon, he has only one trick, try to sidetrack the discussion and hope no one notices.

  159. on 20 Aug 2013 at 8:20 am 159.Angus and Alexis said …

    A has an Evolution fetish or something…

  160. on 20 Aug 2013 at 12:44 pm 160.freddies_dead said …

    533.Edward said …

    Freddie, I made myself clear enough for anyone who really wanted to respond with something meaningful. But it seems you would rather shut down any meaningful discussion with vocabulary corrections, with clever little quips like “OK, so not evolution” or “Oh dear. You don’t really have a clue about evolution do you Edward?” As though attempts at intimidation were signs of intelligence. It’s the bigger picture, Freddie, that matters to me, not the little maze that you want to trap me in.

    Clear? Lol. Your description of the “bigger picture” as you call it was generally incoherent. If you want your words to be taken seriously then you’d be better served by actually understanding that which you seek to deny. The biggest picture is currently best explained by the Theory of Evolution. You refuse to accept this but have no valid alternative so why should I bother taking your meaningless rubbish seriously?

    You have your religion (science, evolution are part of it), your gods, your creed, your set of beliefs and values, etc. And others have theirs.

    The arrogance. I have no gods nor religion despite your ridiculous claim.

    Here’s what you sound like to me.

    “We (who’s house this is) believe that what we believe is more reasonable than what you (whoever you are that don’t believe what we believe) believe. And here is why.”

    And you sound like a whiny bitch who doesn’t like the facte that we’re asking for coherent arguments and evidence, so what?

    So you refer me to your expanded vocabulary and theories of the origin of me, and you want me to accept your beliefs as certain, or certainly more certain than what I believe based on your assertion of evidence you find to be more reasonable than my evidence, or evidence that not just you but others find to be more reasonable than my evidence, too.

    You have yet to present any evidence so, yes, we’re the ones whose certainty is warranted. You want to change that? Then present the evidence that supports your belief.

    You’re as small and predictable as any poster here, including myself.

    If we were that predictable then why did you even bother? And why are you now whining about it? Instead of whining present your evidence. But as DPK has already shown, you won’t. Either because you have none or you already know it won’t stand up to scrutiny.

  161. on 20 Aug 2013 at 12:44 pm 161.freddies_dead said …

    544.Edward said …

    “I note that, as Edward is most likely a drive-by who won’t return to read the responses…”

    It’s about time, Freddie. People just don’t have the kind of time you have to put into futility. You’re right. I won’t last.

    Now who’s so predictable?

  162. on 20 Aug 2013 at 12:45 pm 162.freddies_dead said …

    546.Edward said …

    “Maybe Edward could help us out where A and his sockpuppets have singularly failed? Can Edward give us some evidence for the existence of his God (assuming he is a believer of course)? Perhaps he could pray for some evidence to show up so we can see the efficacy of prayer while we’re at it?”

    Or to Paraphrase:
    Freddie, the ape: (wringing hands) Come children, witness, once again, the baiting and beheading of another one. Oh, joy! Don’t you just love this place? Isn’t this fun?

    Even your paraphrasing is incoherent shite. Do you have anything useful to present? Some evidence? A coherent argument? If not then it’s time that you shook the dust from your feet.

  163. on 20 Aug 2013 at 12:46 pm 163.freddies_dead said …

    550.A said …

    Frederick thinks humans are apes…….well by who he hangs out with, well OK I could see his confusion.

    ROTFL!!!

    The confusion is all yours. Check out the scientific definition for apes. We fit the definition. You throw out the scientific method as if you’ll accept it as some sort of authority but when scientific facts are pointed out to you, all of a sudden that same method is dismissed. If you have evidence that we aren’t apes then present it here and get yourself ready for your Nobel prize. I suspect you’ll present nothing as usual.

  164. on 20 Aug 2013 at 2:54 pm 164.Angus and Alexis said …

    Freddie said…
    “If you have evidence that we aren’t apes then present it here and get yourself ready for your Nobel prize. I suspect you’ll present nothing as usual.”

    A? Give evidence?
    More like “evidense”…ok, that was a lame pun.

    Seriously though, i bet you would get better answers from a six year old, rather than A….

  165. on 20 Aug 2013 at 5:00 pm 165.DPK said …

    That’s a sure bet.

    A, actually more like a 4 year old saying “my father can beat up your father” continually resorts to “well, you believe in evolution and there is no evidence to support that!” as reason to accept that his belief in a magical god being is not irrational and deluded.

    The problem with that thought process of course is… well
    hahahahahah… you already know, don’t you?
    1st, it’s wrong, and 2nd, it’s wrong AND idiotic.

  166. on 20 Aug 2013 at 5:37 pm 166.A said …

    Freddie

    I do not have to prove the negative, you must prove the assertion. You will not just as you refuse to prove you understand the nature of evidence.

    But hey, if you would like to believe you are an ape knock yourself out.

    Still waiting for all this proof for ToE. So much yet not one shred presented. You know paranormal scientist claim they have loads of proof for paranormal activity. Maybe we should compare the two? Good exercise to educate you on the nature of evidence.

  167. on 20 Aug 2013 at 5:58 pm 167.freddies_dead said …

    566.A said …

    Freddie

    I do not have to prove the negative, you must prove the assertion. You will not just as you refuse to prove you understand the nature of evidence.

    Even if we ignore the blatant fucking hypocrisy of A claiming he doesn’t have to prove a negative when he expects us to do just that when we point out his God does not exist, I’m not actually asking him to do that. On the contrary I’m asking for one trait – just one – that shows that humans should not be included in the Hominidae family. That’s all we need but still A ducks the question.

    It’s OK we know why.

    But hey, if you would like to believe you are an ape knock yourself out.

    At least my belief is supported by the evidence. You only believe that you’re special because your Mom told you that you were.

    Still waiting for all this proof for ToE. So much yet not one shred presented.

    Only if you ignore what I presented earlier and if you refuse to go and read up at the other sites you’ve been referred to as A continues to do.

    You know paranormal scientist claim they have loads of proof for paranormal activity.

    And you know what happens when they’re asked to present it? They don’t, either because they don’t actually have any or if they do we find it to be bloody appalling – just like the when creationists are asked to supply their evidence.

    Maybe we should compare the two? Good exercise to educate you on the nature of evidence.

    You keep throwing out this whole “nature of evidence” crap too – as if your actions don’t demonstrate you have no fucking clue yourself ROFLCOPTER.

  168. on 20 Aug 2013 at 6:15 pm 168.A said …

    ” you know what happens when they’re asked to present it? They don’t,”

    Hey! Just like atheists. But alas, the paranormal scientist do. One has to determine if what they claim is evidence truly is evidence.

    Lol!! Yes the nature of evidence is “crap” Freddie? I would expect as much! Sigh…..

  169. on 20 Aug 2013 at 8:30 pm 169.freddies_dead said …

    568.A said …

    ” you know what happens when they’re asked to present it? They don’t,”

    Hey! Just like theists.

    Fixed that for you.

    But alas, the paranormal scientist do. One has to determine if what they claim is evidence truly is evidence.

    Which is why I mentioned “if they do we find it to be bloody appalling – just like when creationists are asked to supply their evidence.”

    If you ever present your evidence then we can see if what you claim truly is evidence … but no, despite asserting your position over and over you never get round to supporting that position with anything even approaching evidence.

    It’s OK, we know why.

    Lol!! Yes the nature of evidence is “crap” Freddie? I would expect as much! Sigh…..

    It’s crap when you start talking about it because you demonstrate, time and time again, that you’re fucking clueless about it.

  170. on 21 Aug 2013 at 12:01 am 170.Angus and Alexis said …

    “But hey, if you would like to believe you are an ape knock yourself out.”

    For one thing, its sad to believe that people out there believe in magic.

    For another, it’s entirely sad to see someone who has no clue on human biology and anatomy…

    “You know paranormal scientist claim they have loads of proof for paranormal activity.”

    What?
    You mean stuff like edited photos, magnetic variations caused by power circuits and scripted documentaries? Right….

    “Yes the nature of evidence is “crap” Freddie? I would expect as much! Sigh…..”

    You are the personification of irony, you make so many claims, you say that we must fit these or we are dismissed, yet you have no idea what you are typing, and do not use them yourself.
    I still wish the admin IP banned you….*sigh*

  171. on 21 Aug 2013 at 12:17 am 171.A said …

    “If you ever present your evidence then we can see if what you claim truly is evidence”

    I agree, are you ready to demonstrate? Will the bar you set for ToE be the same as you require be the same as for God?

    History says your kind cannot! Lol!!

    Anatomy? Lol!!!! Oh Agnus!

  172. on 21 Aug 2013 at 4:11 am 172.Edward said …

    There’s something that I find interesting in reading the posts here. For people who don’t want to believe in God or prayer or religion you sure focus a lot of your time and energy on God and prayer and religion. If I were God I would probably appreciate all the focus you actually direct toward me because you probably give me more of your time and attention than many people who actually profess faith in me. If I were God, you know, I might just want to keep you around.

  173. on 21 Aug 2013 at 5:26 am 173.Angus and Alexis said …

    A said.
    “I agree, are you ready to demonstrate? Will the bar you set for ToE be the same as you require be the same as for God?”

    No, it will be different.

    One explains current biodiversity, the other claims it made the entire universe.

    Edward said.
    “For people who don’t want to believe in God or prayer or religion you sure focus a lot of your time and energy on God and prayer and religion. ”

    Its an interesting topic.

    “If I were God I would probably appreciate all the focus you actually direct toward me because you probably give me more of your time and attention than many people who actually profess faith in me.”

    Perhaps.
    Does not prove his existence though, being that he doesn’t exist…

    “If I were God, you know, I might just want to keep you around.”

    Shame us EVIL atheists are going to HELLLL forever in fire and pain and such.

  174. on 21 Aug 2013 at 11:22 am 174.freddies_dead said …

    571.A said …

    “If you ever present your evidence then we can see if what you claim truly is evidence”

    I agree, are you ready to demonstrate?

    I already have done. We’re waiting for you to do the same, but you can’t/won’t.

    It’s OK, we know why.

    Will the bar you set for ToE be the same as you require be the same as for God?

    History says your kind cannot! Lol!!

    Why would you even expect it to be? The claims made by the ToE may be big but they’re in no way as extraordinary as the claim that an omnimax deity exists and created everything. As such the ToE can get by on much more mundane evidence such as comparative anatomy, comparative genomics, the faunal succession evident in the fossil record etc… etc…

    However, we haven’t even asked you for extraordinary evidence that your God exists, we’ve asked for any evidence that you have that your God exists and so far? Nothing, nada, zip, zero.

    It’s OK, we know why.

  175. on 21 Aug 2013 at 11:41 am 175.freddies_dead said …

    572.Edward said …

    There’s something that I find interesting in reading the posts here. For people who don’t want to believe in God or prayer or religion you sure focus a lot of your time and energy on God and prayer and religion.

    Firstly, it’s not necessarily that we don’t want to believe, it’s that there’s no evidence to suggest that that belief would be warranted. Who wants to believe in something for no good reason?

    Secondly, a few minutes a day showing A’s stupidity for what it is is hardly “a lot of time and energy”. There are some who do spend a lot of time and energy on this though, but only because those who profess a belief are spending a lot of time, energy and money on trying to force that belief onto others through legislation. It makes it “interesting” as Angus has noted.

    If I were God I would probably appreciate all the focus you actually direct toward me because you probably give me more of your time and attention than many people who actually profess faith in me. If I were God, you know, I might just want to keep you around.

    And this is all the believer can do; imagine what he would do if he were God because there’s no actual God to show what would really happen.

  176. on 21 Aug 2013 at 11:46 am 176.alex said …

    “For people who don’t want to believe in God or prayer or religion you sure focus a lot of your time and energy on God and prayer and religion.”

    atheists focus a hell of a lot less than you xtian morons do, in fucking with mooslims. proof? count the damn atheists sites versus religious sites. next.

    your apologetic heritage is in full bloom. atheists focus on the bullshitiness of gawd, prayor and religionism. there ain’t no God, otherwise you assholes would have proved it a long time ago. keep waiving that faith flag, ya dipshit.

  177. on 21 Aug 2013 at 12:10 pm 177.A said …

    “Why would you even expect it to be? The claims made by the ToE may be big”

    You think? They are HUGE if no intelligence guides it and yet you believe with no proof. Therefore we conclude rightly you believe through faith. You believe nature created DNA and eventually Nam and did so by pure chance. Sorry, that requires proof. I cannot muster that kind of faith.

    Throwing out a tetrapod is not meeting the burden of proof. Lol!!!!

  178. on 21 Aug 2013 at 1:15 pm 178.Edward said …

    Good thing, you’re all actually still alive then.

    This is your house. You threw down the gauntlet for others to provide evidence for their beliefs but you hide IN YOUR OWN HOUSE when someone asks the same of you. Where are your balls, boys (girls)? What’s the matter, isn’t there enough of you to help out?

    You believe that modern mankind has arrived here and now from some other classification of animal. As you are asking for undeniable, irrefutable evidence that proves, beyond a shadow of doubt, what others believe, I am asking the same of you. As you look around for evidence of what others believe you don’t see it. It’s not apparent. Ditto. If what you believe is not of faith, but a fact, then please provide your proof so that we can verify it. If you have it, then why evade such a simple request?

  179. on 21 Aug 2013 at 1:44 pm 179.alex said …

    “If you have it, then why evade such a simple request?”

    because nobody in here is making ridiculous absolute claims. toe, the big bang, obama, gays, et all are just side diversions, a byproduct of all the other crap you morons keep bringing up.

    treat me like a long lost aboriginal tribe who doesn’t want to swallow your bullshit tripe. what’s your proof? please don’t even start with that moral crap. if you do, let’s see it and i’ll pass it with flying colors.

  180. on 21 Aug 2013 at 3:32 pm 180.freddies_dead said …

    577.A said …

    “Why would you even expect it to be? The claims made by the ToE may be big”

    You think?

    Yes I do, that’s why I said it.

    They are HUGE if no intelligence guides it and yet you believe with no proof.

    There’s ample proof, that you refuse to accept that fact is neither my nor evolution’s problem.

    Therefore we conclude rightly you believe through faith.

    Who’s this “we” you’re on about? Your sockpuppets don’t count. You conclude wrong, dismissing 150+ years of evidence because it doesn’t support your bizarro version of the ToE doesn’t work. You actually need to show how the evidence presented doesn’t support the actual ToE. Then you need to present a theory that does actually account for all that evidence. For some reason you can’t/won’t do this.

    It’s OK, we know why.

    You believe nature created DNA and eventually Nam and did so by pure chance.

    Who said anything about “pure chance”? Oh, that’s right, you. Part of your bizarro version of the ToE but not what the actual ToE claims. I’m unsurprised at you lack of understanding.

    Sorry, that requires proof. I cannot muster that kind of faith.

    No faith required when there’s 150+ years worth of evidence to support evolution.

    Throwing out a tetrapod is not meeting the burden of proof. Lol!!!!

    It met the burden you placed. I know you don’t want to accept that but that’s just tough shit.

    Now it’s your turn. Where’s your evidence for the existence of your God? Come on, I’m not even asking for extraordinary evidence for your extraordinary claim. Why do you refuse to present any evidence at all?

    It’s OK, we know why.

  181. on 21 Aug 2013 at 3:42 pm 181.freddies_dead said …

    578.Edward said …

    Good thing, you’re all actually still alive then.

    Why? Is something bad going to happen when we die? How do you know this? Where is your evidence?

    This is your house. You threw down the gauntlet for others to provide evidence for their beliefs

    It is and we did. Why then are you unwilling/unable to provide such evidence?

    but you hide IN YOUR OWN HOUSE when someone asks the same of you.

    The only ones hiding here are the theists. It is they who have yet to present even a single iota of evidence.

    Where are your balls, boys (girls)? What’s the matter, isn’t there enough of you to help out?

    You’re rubber and I’m glue…

    Where’s your evidence?

    You believe that modern mankind has arrived here and now from some other classification of animal.

    You don’t? Present your alternative. Give us the evidence.

    As you are asking for undeniable, irrefutable evidence that proves, beyond a shadow of doubt, what others believe, I am asking the same of you.

    Where have we done this? I’ve pointed out over and over again. Present any evidence, anything you think supports the claim that a God exists. So far nothing, zip, nada, zero. Why can’t you do it?

    As you look around for evidence of what others believe you don’t see it. It’s not apparent.

    So where is it then? You believe it exists, make your case.

    Ditto. If what you believe is not of faith, but a fact, then please provide your proof so that we can verify it.

    Already done. Not just here on this site but on multiple sites and in hundreds of books detailing the 150+ years of evidence and how it leads to the ToE as the best explanation of modern biodiversity.

    If you have it, then why evade such a simple request?

    Right back atcha.

  182. on 21 Aug 2013 at 5:07 pm 182.A said …

    ” wrong, dismissing 150+ years of evidence”

    Dismiss? Never! I’m waiting for the first piece. And you have it! Great!!! Lets see it, you do have more than a tetrapod, right? Whadda ya got, some moths on a tree? Some embryo drawings? Come on, lets see the undeniable truths. This is exciting Freddie!! I bought in at one time and I am looking to come back!!

  183. on 21 Aug 2013 at 7:52 pm 183.DPK said …

    Sigh…
    For A and Edward… here is the reader’s digest version.
    If you like, you can digest it and then come back with a point by point refutation and of course, your alternate theory! Your Nobel Prize awaits….
    (changed the . to a (dot) to avoid moderation purgatory.

    http://evolution.berkeley (dot) edu/evolibrary/article/0_0_0/lines_01

    Now, can we put your idiotic evolution fetish aside since it has nothing to do with the topic… do you have any evidence that gods exists, and specifically that they somehow intercede in the physical world in response to the human activity of praying, or are you willing to admit that praying is no different from wishing on a moonbeam? That is, after all, the point of this board and in particular, this thread.

  184. on 22 Aug 2013 at 12:04 am 184.Angus and Alexis said …

    Perhaps the best question is why do people say “MY PRAYER WORKED AND CURED HIS CANCER WOOT!” when someone is saved, but otherwise if they die, they dismiss the fact that god must have let him die, perhaps painfully.

    And if god already has a plan (God’s plan, what an original name..) why do people pray? It makes the plan nonexistent. But perhaps all along the plan was to pray and fail or succeed…ON PURPOSE. which goes into the confusing loop of plan to changing plan..

    Then there is the free will issue. If there is a plan, we have no free will.
    No matter what happens, i will HAVE to choose pancakes instead of toast tomorrow, regardless of what happens. Which makes us nothing more than puppets.

    Then there is the annoying issue of how if god has a plan, and it was made just for you from the second you were born. Then he deliberately makes atheists just to throw into hell. How is this fair in any way? Being puppeted from birth to death just to be killed like a cow in the slaughterhouse.
    A&A

  185. on 22 Aug 2013 at 12:08 am 185.Angus and Alexis said …

    *continued*

    Then there are the chain-prayers. Why do christians make thousands of prayer onto one thing? Isn’t god omnipresent, and hence can hear your prayer regardless of the situation? Isn’t he meant to answer ANY prayer that you ask of him? Isn’t he omnipotent? And hence can do anything he wants, regardless of the task?

    Lastly, doesn’t the bible say stuff like “Stone people to death” “kill gays” and such? How is this loving? Where does this crazy hate for same sex couples come from? Why would god deliberately make one in ten humans gay just to watch them suffer from the no same sex marriage laws and from bullying? (That being said, not all gays want to marry.)

    A&A

  186. on 22 Aug 2013 at 1:03 am 186.A said …

    “come back with a point by point refutation and of course, your alternate theory!”

    No, much like you guys for origins, I do not need to replace your faith based psuedo-science with an alternate theory. That does tell me you must have major doubts. Second, I will not dig through links you would like to drag others down with. If it is obvious and everyone is a believer you should be able to provide one irrefutable fact from your own education. You cannot which again shows you believe in faith.

    Again you do NOT understand evidence, this is obvious therefore you should get educated and begin by thinking for yourself. I am a recovering believer and the freedom is refreshing.

    Can’t provide even one, huh? Gotta have a link?

  187. on 22 Aug 2013 at 1:15 am 187.DPK said …

    So there you have it. Proof of Ass’s completely disingenuous intentions. He demands proof, then refuses to consider it when it is presented.
    A fraud, liar and troll.

  188. on 22 Aug 2013 at 3:52 am 188.Angus and Alexis said …

    “So there you have it. Proof of Ass’s completely disingenuous intentions. He demands proof, then refuses to consider it when it is presented.
    A fraud, liar and troll.”

    We already knew this ;D.

  189. on 22 Aug 2013 at 10:47 am 189.Angus and Alexis said …

    “I am a recovering believer and the freedom is refreshing.”

    You enjoy freedom?
    Good, i do to.

    Now can you make same sex marriage legal?

    I thought not…

  190. on 22 Aug 2013 at 11:37 am 190.freddies_dead said …

    582.A said …

    ”wrong, dismissing 150+ years of evidence”

    Dismiss? Never!

    And yet that’s exactly what you’ve done.

    I’m waiting for the first piece. And you have it!

    And I’ve already posted it.

    Great!!! Lets see it,

    Already done. Your refusal to consider it is your problem, not mine.

    you do have more than a tetrapod, right?

    Why do I need more? It’s exactly what you asked for – evidence for evolution found using the scientific method. Why are you trying to move the goalposts? Or maybe you simply aren’t sure what you asked for? After all you seem very confused about what the theory of evolution predicts or how the evidence supports those predictions. Maybe you could tell us what you understand by “the theory of evolution” and what you expect to see as evidence to support the theory? Then we can compare what your think is the theory of evolution to what the theory of evolution actually is.

    Whadda ya got, some moths on a tree?

    And why do you dismiss the moths as evolutionary evidence? Do you have a better explanation for the phenomenon? If so, what is it? An intelligent designer? Do you have any evidence at all that designer exists and does the designing you’d like to credit him with? If not then how can we discern this designer from something you may merely be imagining?

    Some embryo drawings?

    What have Haeckel’s drawings go to do with the discussion? And why would you think we’d present them as evidence of evolution? Do you even know what was wrong with the drawings?

    Come on, lets see the undeniable truths.

    You have already been presented with all the evidence you need. You choose to dismiss it though. That is your problem, not mine.

    This is exciting Freddie!! I bought in at one time and I am looking to come back!!

    I simply don’t believe you. You’ve shown time and time again that you don’t actually understand what the theory of evolution is, let alone explain why the evidence presented doesn’t support the theory. As such your claim to have “bought in” seems spurious. I would ask why you would buy in to something you seem to know absolutely nothing about and haven’t considered the evidence for but then you’re a self professed theist and we can see that it all fits with your faith based position.

    Are you ready to present the evidence for your God yet? We keep asking but you keep refusing.

    Don’t worry, we know why.

  191. on 22 Aug 2013 at 11:58 am 191.freddies_dead said …

    I can’t be the only one hoping the erstwhile site owners put up a new topic for discussion soon can I?

    This one has turned into a dull procession where A refuses to acknowledge that he’s been given the evidence he asked for, before adamantly refusing to present even the smallest piece of evidence for the God he professes to believe in. You have to wonder why someone would be so reluctant to offer such evidence if they had it?

    Don’t worry, we know why.

  192. on 22 Aug 2013 at 12:04 pm 192.freddies_dead said …

    Or maybe A has been praying to his God for the last month and half and doesn’t realise that the total lack of a response isn’t because his God wants him to wait … it’s because his God doesn’t exist.

    Is this it A? Or do you have some evidence that you don’t have to pray for? If you do then we’d all be happy for you to present it. Why on earth would you refuse?

    Don’t worry, we know why.

  193. on 22 Aug 2013 at 12:27 pm 193.A said …

    ‘Why do I need more? It’s exactly what you asked for – evidence for evolution found using the scientific method”

    lol!! What I asked for? Bah!!!!!!! Scientific method? Really? Good! Using the scientific method show us that Tetrapods did evolve from fish or a mammal or whatever you think it evolved from into another species.

    So how is it advantageous, according to ToE and Lamarckian, for a marine dwelling animal to acquire the traits of a land dwelling anima? This is assuming you can prove a tetrapod was once another species.

    Good luck

  194. on 22 Aug 2013 at 12:50 pm 194.Angus and Alexis said …

    “So how is it advantageous, according to ToE and Lamarckian, for a marine dwelling animal to acquire the traits of a land dwelling anima?”

    Land= more food, territory and escape from predators.
    In a nutshell.

  195. on 22 Aug 2013 at 2:22 pm 195.DPK said …

    Ass said… again in relation to the irrelevant topic of evolution:
    “you should be able to provide one irrefutable fact from your own education…”

    This is from the moron who claims that WE do not understand the nature of “evidence”. hahahaha
    You think that all scientific theories hinge on ONE piece of evidence?

    We provided you with 4 broad categories of evidence each with hundreds or thousands of individual “pieces” of evidence… all pointing to the same conclusion… and you refuse the “wade through it”…. willful ignorance is its own punishment.

    Now, your sideshow of distractions is once again outted and your irrelevant topic of evolution is once again dismissed as the rantings of a lunatic…
    If you have any evidence that your proposed god actually exists and that he intercedes in the physical world in response to prayers… I will be happy to “wade through it”. Do you have it, or not?

  196. on 22 Aug 2013 at 4:12 pm 196.A said …

    “Land= more food, territory and escape from predators.”

    lol!!!! So is this the scientific method at work? So a fish who has a diet of seaweed decides I’m a gonna jump out of the water and get some good land grass?

    Next he decides, hey no predators up there I bet! I can rule the land.

    Last big decision: Its just to crowded down here in the sea, I nee to jump out and see if I can get my own hood! Lol!!!

    Wow! What’s that you or the Tulip that came up with those Deuce?

  197. on 22 Aug 2013 at 4:39 pm 197.DPK said …

    ” So a fish who has a diet of seaweed decides I’m a gonna jump out of the water and get some good land grass?”

    Ass clearly has absolutely no understanding of the theory of evolution what so ever, as evidenced by this “argument.” This is very akin to trying to explain algebra to a housecat. On top of that, when presented with the resources to actually learn something about that which he ridicules in his ignorance, he declares he hasn’t got time to wade though all that book learnin’ stuff fer eggheads. In short, he demands a 3rd grade explanation and then dismisses it because it seems to be a 3rd grade explanation.

    So, Ass, got any evidence that your god actually exists, or that gods indeed intercede in the physical world in response to prayers? Anything at all? You mean you have absolutely NOTHING to offer except your childish misunderstanding of the process of evolution and natural selection, and you somehow think this is god proof?

  198. on 23 Aug 2013 at 8:57 am 198.Angus and Alexis said …

    DPK said.
    “In short, he demands a 3rd grade explanation and then dismisses it because it seems to be a 3rd grade explanation.”

    Yeah, i know…

    He says 3rd grade explanations are stupid.
    And dismisses more advanced explanations because it doesn’t fit his own version of ToE…

    That said, why are we talking about evolution?
    Its irrelevant.

    Lets talk about prayer shall we?

  199. on 23 Aug 2013 at 9:33 am 199.freddies_dead said …

    593.A said …

    ‘Why do I need more? It’s exactly what you asked for – evidence for evolution found using the scientific method”

    lol!! What I asked for?

    Yes. It was your way of diverting the conversation away from what a total waste of time prayer is.

    Bah!!!!!!! Scientific method? Really? Good!

    Yes, really. You simply demonstrate your ignoranc of the scientific method every time you question it. I suppose you think it helps you continue to divert the attention away from what a total waste of time prayer is.

    Using the scientific method show us that Tetrapods did evolve from fish or a mammal or whatever you think it evolved from into another species.

    I already gave you the starting point. Now it’s up to you to follow it through. There a many, many sites on the net that could help. Read some books on evolution. Maybe go do a biology class or two. Now we can get back to what a total waste of time prayer is.

    So how is it advantageous, according to ToE and Lamarckian, for a marine dwelling animal to acquire the traits of a land dwelling anima?

    I see you’ve thrown Lamarckism in as an extra diversion. A pre-Darwinian theory regarding the inheritance of acquired traits which has been shown to be wrong by Mendelian genetics. Did you pray for the extra diversion hint? Did God tell you to throw in a new red herring? Or is it just that prayer is a total waste of time so you just grabbed any old think you found in a Google search?

    This is assuming you can prove a tetrapod was once another species.

    Holy shit you’re an imbecile. Tetrapoda is a fucking superclass, not a species. You really do have absolutely no clue what evolution is or what the Theory of Evolution describes. Pray for guidance A, or are you ready to admit what a total waste of time prayer is?

    Good luck

    I’d need more than luck A, I’d need a fucking miracle in order to explain what is a fairly simple concept to someone as gormless as you.

    There’s absolutely no point carrying on a discussion about evolution with you as you have no idea what people are saying.

    Pray to your God for understanding A, then you could come back once He’s given you a clue. Of course we all know that prayer is a complete waste of time which is why you’ve spent the last 400 comments trying to derail the conversation with a theory you’ve got no clue about.

  200. on 23 Aug 2013 at 11:40 am 200.A said …

    Let me sum up the proof Frederick has for ToE.

    Tetrapod

    There it is. Tetrapod proves DNA evolved out of Campbell’s soup, the brain evolved from clay and man evolved from scarecrows. Yep, typing Tetrapod into your browser is the equivalent of the scientific method, for things WANT to believe. Yes Frederick, I do understand your faith.. …i mean science.

    Here ya go Frederick.

    Creation

Trackback This Post | Subscribe to the comments through RSS Feed

Leave a Reply