+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 17 to 31 of 31

  1. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Stow, OH SOL III
    Posts
    3,231

    Re: Scientifc Evidence Refutes Atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    It is obvious you haven't watched the video. Instead of doing a demographic analysis of viewers, why don't you watch the video? I posted it for viewing not stupid comments about creationist or analysis of responses.

    I should have expected such replies from closed minded atheist.
    You Made this post (per my time) at 06-21-2012, 12:55 AM.

    So, let's look at the sequence here.

    Posted at 06-21-2012, 08:19 PM and contains a link to a 5 minute video.

    One (1) hour and 5 minutes later I post;

    So, not only did I have enough time to watch this 5 min. video (13 times) but my two links contain around 10 hours of video.

    Then only 3 hours and 31 minutes later you post;



    Umm, I had enough time to watch your video 13 times. You did not even have enough time to watch a third of my videos.

    And you post this?;
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    It is obvious you haven't watched the video.

    I should have expected such replies from closed minded atheist.
    And you wonder why people refer to you as a hypocrite and idiot.
    Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science. -C. Darwin

  2. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Scientifc Evidence Refutes Atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by nomaxim View Post
    You Made this post (per my time) at 06-21-2012, 12:55 AM.

    So, let's look at the sequence here.


    Posted at 06-21-2012, 08:19 PM and contains a link to a 5 minute video.

    One (1) hour and 5 minutes later I post;


    So, not only did I have enough time to watch this 5 min. video (13 times) but my two links contain around 10 hours of video.

    Then only 3 hours and 31 minutes later you post;

    Umm, I had enough time to watch your video 13 times. You did not even have enough time to watch a third of my videos.

    And you post this?;

    And you wonder why people refer to you as a hypocrite and idiot.
    [quote]

    I made that reply because you didn't comment on the content of my video about the big bang.

    To avoid a misunderstanding, I'll study your videos. My topic about science has been a natural science explanation which is about creation and the universe.

    Let's get along. :liefde:

  3. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Scientifc Evidence Refutes Atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by GHOST DOG View Post
    I've heard you relate your dreams on here....and they speak of supernatural events, as most human dreams do.
    When did one of your "supernatural dreams" ever come true in our reality?
    Supernatural is just what the word means....."super," as in:
    Natural is just that; Natural. Super, placed before natural then means over and above that which appears natural.
    So far, all that we have ever had is only natural:
    So far, all of my dreams have been about angels, Satan, the universe, and characters and events in the Bible. Nothing about the future.

    I posted this suggestion:
    Quote:
    You can prove the impersonality of these creative forces to yourself if you drop your religious bias, if only for a short time....when was the last time that you and your god had a real, personal interaction, like a visitation?

    You posted:

    Quote:
    You have a bad habit of telling me how to think. We've been through this before. I've already posted my dreams. It is useless to discuss them, I get only ridicule.

    "Telling you how to think" would look like this:
    Quote:
    Cnance, you're an idiot!
    Don't you know
    that this way of thinking is just wrong? You should change your whole way of thinking and be a thinker like me!
    You can prove the impersonality of these creative forces to yourself if you drop your religious bias, if only for a short time....when was the last time that you and your god had a real, personal interaction, like a visitation?
    (In fact, if I were to just using the word "idiot," it would imply that you don't know how to think.)

    My reply is a suggestion for you to think for yourself, temporarily going on a "fishing trip," to explore your options.
    I am not telling you HOW to think.
    I am not unhappy with my dreams or what I've concluded from them, so I have no such need for a diversion. My dreams have been more of a burden then a benefit. Because they're so real, I've learned to live with them.

    Oh, please....where do you get that I'm the final authority?
    I'm only the "final authority" on that which I've studied and understood for my life, Cnance.
    When issue opinions about what I should or should not do, it's irritating.

    And I've been on that "supernatural path" like you are now, for a long time, and studied everything that was interrelated to this field, and there has never, ever, been sufficiently incontrovertible evidence pointing to any event belonging to the supernatural in our reality.
    This is where we differ. I don't know why I have had dreams about supernatural events. I also had an encounter with God when I was a teenager. It lead to many years of rehabilitation until I could function normally. I don't like discussing that part of my life, I nearly committed suicide. That's why I understand prophets experiences. Being in the presence of God tears you apart. If you recover, your never the same. Again, I don't like to discuss it. It's just a reply to your question.

    If you have this incontrovertible evidence for the supernatural, please send it along with your next post, as we would all like to examine it.
    Again, it was a personal experience that I don't like to discuss. Rather than claiming it has irrefutable evidence of God, I prefer to keep the discussion on science.

    When did a natural disaster become a "moral issue?"
    You made comments about horrible things happening to humans, earthquakes, etc. caused by a "hypothetical" God.

    Or did your version of a god cause these poor folks to die, making the event his moral dilemma?
    The truth as I see it is that we are at the mercies of the universe and it's natural forces.....no more and no less.
    From my dreams I conclude God originally favored dinosaurs and other wonderful creatures in paradise about 65 million years ago. We're collateral damage from that important event. So, contrary to Christians beliefs God doesn't really love us. Even so, God established a relationship with his chosen people and even came into the world as Jesus. So, even though there may be no salvation, God made a gallant effort.

    Great point, Cnance.
    Which portions of the bible are indeed flawed, and which portions of the bible are not?
    Is this "pick and choose" time?
    Here I get in to real trouble. From my dreams I only have a small slice of the real story. However, those dreams about the Bible seem to cover the most important events in both the New and Old Testaments. My most significant dream was about the OT where a voice said, "it happened but not that way."

    Christianity supposes that the bible is the "word of god."
    It is the word of flawed man about God. That's what I believe.

    Atheists propose that the bible isn't at all accurate, especially where it speaks of "divine intervention," or the supernatural events it relates.
    Some Bible events are correct. In one dream, an angel stood over a large field of dead soldiers looking up at God. He said, "it has been done." That was the event mentioned by Isaiah others (Isaiah 37:38). "the Lord went out and put to death a hundred and eighty thousand men in the Assyrian camp."

    You state that portions of it are flawed.
    Simple equation: portions of your version of god are then flawed.
    I have no vested interest in promoting my ideas about the Bible. I am replying to your inquiry. I am certain no one will every change their interpretation of the Bible because of me. I'm an investor, not an religious leader. Incidentally, I am proud to announce I saved my portfolio from disaster. Just as the market hit 13,000 I sold into bonds. Now, I feel secure knowing I'm safe from a very volatile market.

    Your thinking on this is flawed, Cnance, simply because it fails to deliver on the logic that we all live with.
    On the other hand, have you ever been to the "well" that consistently delivers logic and reason?
    You've been in "Christianity land" for a long time, haven't you?
    You're wrong. I don't get along in discussions with Christians. How could I with my ideas? I go to church because most Christians are good people and, mostly, they have good intentions.

    Have you ever been to "Atheist, or Agnostic land," without the usual bias that your religious side brings, for a long spell?
    Many of my friends in the academic community are atheist and agnostics. In grad school, I was one of the only Christians. So, I've had a broad exposure.

    I pretty much know what Christians go through as in "believing" and calling it "faith" to clean it up, in order to justify the cause in their minds, Cnance.
    Yes, Christianity is a total belief system. Because I don't believe much of the gospels about Paul, I don't think that way. Remember, my idea is Jesus was God, not his son. The real story about Jesus (God) is Revelation 11.

    I've been to both camps, the Christian view of life, multiple times for my first 44 years, and the Agnostic view of it, for 20 years, or so....both for a very long time.
    I've been around those groups and was part of Christian organizations at various times. Because my wife is a strong Christian, I attend a local church with her. Most of my dreams have occurred in the past thirty years, so I have gradually evolved my own ideas about God and the Bible.

    Don't knock the Agnostic view unless you have been steeped in it for a long time, Cnance.
    In age, I believe I am older than you. I've worked at the docks, been in the military, worked for financial institutions, and been a college professor. Without my personal experiences I would probably be an agnostic.

    "The Old Testament?"
    Is this one of the parts that are "flawed by human hands" or are we just not quite sure? So is this "pick and choose" time again?
    I am certain the OT is the only record humans have of God's intervention in human affairs.

    Again...I only "hate" misinformation and stupidity, Cnance.
    It is however difficult to know what is misinformation. If I hadn't had my experiences I would be struggling to figure it out. I would probably being going to Bible classes. Every since I was a youth, I've believed
    God. I have however always had a questioning mind.

    Oh.....like all good Christians I've been all over the Christian bible, King James, Latin Vulgate, Catholic, etc.
    I even speak a little Latin.
    Sounds familiar, I've also been down that road.

    No. An "illogical" argument would be the one involving "supernatural" events, of which there is no proof of.
    Science can only go on what it discovers to be peer-reviewed, real, repeatable, and logical.
    Unfortunately, there is no empirical proof for God.

    Unlike religion, they just cannot add anything like the supernatural, which doesn't follow any of these axioms.

    They theorize about different known facts, and when they do this they only follow that which can be seen as mathematically correct, in any given scenario, or what must later be found out, once more facts are discovered.
    Science wasn't around then, so we have an ignorant version of the world from the Bible.

    The Vacuum Fluctuation Theory has been described as working well in the light of what is known.
    We've debated with this theory on here, many times.
    This theory offers an "answer" that follows the mathematics and therefore the logic well.
    I agree. Studying VP is mind boggling, but very rewarding. I keep looking for new discoveries. Lately, I have been analyzing physical laws with respect to VP. I think VP is the micro world of our physical universe connected to both matter and energy. I keep going back to the chicken and egg argument. Because VP is a product of vacuum fluctuations in space as related to time, there must be a causal link connecting to some kind of barrier, which is the beginning of VP events.

    Comparing it to the religious view of creation, with it's conjecture and faith in the supernatural, is like comparing the Sears Tower to a mud hut.
    I think you must consider circumstances for the OT. Science wasn't around back then. I don't believe the Genisus version of creation. I believe other parts of Genisus about God's relationship with Abraham, etc.

    No, I claim that science has solved SOME problems.
    I agree, without science we would have shorter life spans, suffer diseases and have a poor quality of life.

    I also claim that science will continue to solve more problems than religion ever will.
    Religion works in a shoe box, where science works in a universe.
    I never thought religion could deliver on it's promises. When I make a trade I don't even consider religion. I am convinced God has assumed a policy of nonintervention ever since humans murdered him.

    Science has given us an answer that shows to WORK as far as creation from "nothing."
    I can't dispute that.

    You've seen my postings on this vacuum fluctuation theory many times in the past.
    I suggest that if you want to review this old territory, you go back and re-visit my old stuff on your own.
    I thought you mentioned scientist solving the from nothing issue, so I asked. I don't think that has been solved. It would be the smoking gun.

    As I stated above, I've posted these studies in the past, however its high time that YOU post some studies on at least the "supernatural" so that you can advance your premise of "eternity" and "supernatural."
    I've told you my views based on experiences. You know, if the prophets were alive today, they would say the same thing. It is not possible to translate a supernatural experience into material words. All you have are words that describe something that has no material boundaries.

    Otherwise your premise will remain stagnant and effectively "dead."

    IF your version of a Personal God spoken of in the bible was indeed logical, being a "Personal God," just like any event, would beg a logical impetus, that is a logical need for God to exist, this being a need to construct a universe for "Satan's imprisonment" (as you state) and us, his children to exist.

    So your version of god cannot be the FIRST impetus to exist, being that a LOGICAL NEED existed first...the "need" to create our universe.

    An Impersonal creator wouldn't have a need, or "agenda" (and no agenda for the universe to "be" has ever been found) to do anything as Energies or Forces interact and have interacted causing formation of more matter and energies...much more viable, observable, and reasonable than the former idea.

    It is already viewed in our existence to be this way everywhere we look, in that everything is "eating" everything else. (On the hunt for energy and taking it from everything else.)
    I know this is sensitive territory. I just enjoy debating what I know about God. I have thought about posting a thread about dinosaurs and paradise, but because there are no references for such ideas, it would be ridiculed. It explains a lot however about Satan. Why would God create dinosaurs and then destroy them. Well, the answer may be because Satan came into paradise and turned God's creatures away from him. Then, God destroyed the dinosaurs with an asteroid or comet.

  4. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Scientifc Evidence Refutes Atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by LogicallyYours View Post
    Here is just one. There are plenty of videos and articles.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rt-UIfkcgPY

    "...the Science is sound." Yes it is but, it goes past Science and makes assumptions...trying to transfer the credibility of the Science to the assumption. It's disingenuous at best and it's a logical fallacy.

    More later...heading to the gym.
    I watched your video. The arguments seem to be the polar opposite of mainstream astronomy. As an example, the video proposes multiple universes whereby the probability of interaction of universes produces a finely tuned universe. This is a problem in that there is no evidence for multiple universes.

    The video states that fining tuned universe producing life is a stretch in that you would expect life forms from the vastness of stars, planets, and intergalactic collisions. It is interesting, here we have a statement of what else do you expect from so much activity in the universe! Whereas, in my video, the perception is it's amazing that life has been produced from such impossible conditions. Both perspectives, using the same data, derived at opposite conclusions. Thus, we have two interpretations. In short, it depends on what are your looking for. In that context, good lawyers are as good as competent scientist.

    It is a problem for everyone. If scientific conclusions are clouded by preconceived ideas, there's no objectivity. Therefore the winner has the biggest data-loaded, scientific theory with some good old fashion spin thrown in.

    I think I'm ready to throw in the towel. I too am going to the gym. At least I'll keep my body in shape.
    Last edited by Cnance; 06-23-2012 at 05:52 PM.

  5. #21
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: Scientifc Evidence Refutes Atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I watched your video. The arguments seem to be the polar opposite of mainstream astronomy. As an example, the video proposes multiple universes whereby the probability of interaction of universes produces a finely tuned universe. This is a problem in that there is no evidence for multiple universes.

    The video states that fining tuned universe producing life is a stretch in that you would expect life forms from the vastness of stars, planets, and intergalactic collisions. It is interesting, here we have a statement of what else do you expect from so much activity in the universe! Whereas, in my video, the perception is it's amazing that life has been produced from such impossible conditions. Both perspectives, using the same data, derived at opposite conclusions. Thus, we have two interpretations. In short, it depends on what are your looking for. In that context, good lawyers are as good as competent scientist.

    It is a problem for everyone. If scientific conclusions are clouded by preconceived ideas, there's no objectivity. Therefore the winner has the biggest data-loaded, scientific theory with some good old fashion spin thrown in
    Wow...so much wrong with your analysis. Did you actually watch the video?

    The concept of fine tuning is based on perspective. The faithful look at the current state of the universe, and in their fixed, unable to change paradigm because their book dictates the outcome, view the results as made for them.

    Science, however, examines the results without the biased dictates of the book and weighs the evidence on its own merits and then follows to where it leads. It doesn't identify the destination and then cherry-pick the evidence or discard the evidence that doesn't work.

    I think I'm ready to throw in the towel. I too am going to the gym. At least I'll keep my body in shape.
    Wow...you think so highly of your capacity to debate and reason, you feel you're in a position to condescend? How when you can't actually defend your position?

    You just can't seem to grasp that, attacking science in no way proves your position...you need to present positive evidence that supports your position. You haven't and you can't. You are unable to present evidence for supernatural creation AND you are unable to present evidence for a supernatural being.

    Perhaps you should forgo the gym and spend more time in the library.
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  6. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Glendale Az
    Posts
    1,249

    Re: Scientifc Evidence Refutes Atheism.

    The faithful look at the current state of the universe, and in their fixed, unable to change paradigm because their book dictates the outcome, view the results as made for them.
    Taking from the material that I've been exposed to and understood, when a human being is born into this life, most of them have the "childlike" view of existence.
    It takes serious personal work to overcome this view. Most folks never even start the job.

    Children "discover," as they slowly and figuratively turn in a complete circle, that they are standing in the middle of the circle, the most important place.
    This action tells them subliminally that everything has been created for them, and is about them and their needs.
    They say to themselves internally, "I must be the most important, and the proof is that I'm in the middle of the circle.
    Therefore, everything around me was created for MY benefit."

    This example stresses the importance of a person questioning and testing everything that they come into contact with, if it is a real working set of truths that they wish to create for themselves.

    Its the old analogy of when we are born we enter into a movie theatre.

    The movie has been rolling now for a great, long time, but we haven't experienced the portions that happened before we arrived...some of us think we know but we do not test, as this would mean that we might find that we have been duped.

    And then we leave before the movie is over, thinking that we know exactly what will happen to us, because we have "The Truth."

    All we know is what we hear from other people if we refuse to do the personal work of an unbiased search.
    So we choose to believe others whose truths look much like our own, for we believe that they know and wouldn't harm us. However most of the untrained folks tend to not look at any truth for very long that conflicts with that which they keep true for themselves...be it a tested truth, or not.

    This helps to create doubt, fear, and guilt in our lives, because we still do not have our own personal truth that passes the test of reality.

    When they stress their fears, the believers are then told not to question matters of faith, but to relax and have "faith."

    This is effectively telling people to not take responsibility for their own truth.
    It is hard to watch people get turned into sheep, since it is quite a crippling experience for them, IMHO.

    Most of these people tend to stay childlike in the "comfort zone" of complacency and fear, looking to the security of "knowing" what happened and what will happen.

    Since their minds are still locked in "I'm the reason that everything was created" mode, they do not have and do not want the "tools" of a meticulous, truly-unbiased search, nor the desire to create the structured environment inside their minds that would cause them to see that which would destroy their childlike beliefs.

    The bottom line is that they continue to color everything with their old, stagnant thinking.

    The main idea that I'm working to expose is that these folks tend to look for the truth that fits their personally-created scenarios because it feels good, and therefore is comforting to them, although highly biased by their emotions.


    Whether this 'knowledge" is truly factual or not isn't important to a sheep. It is important to them because it feels right since it answers their inner-child's questions, even though it is untested and wouldn't pass the common sense test, it "works" for their complacent, and settled-for "truth."

    Real truth is formed by hard work, under the rigorous scrutiny of a structured system which is unafraid to change an entire system of previously-held axioms because of new and incontrovertible evidence...such as the system found in the sciences, where answers are viable, logical, repeatable, and peer-reviewed without bias, or attachment to any agenda.
    Last edited by GHOST DOG; 06-24-2012 at 12:42 PM.
    Most people can't think, most of the remainder won't think, the small fraction who do think mostly can't do it very well. The extremely tiny fraction who think regularly, accurately, creatively, and without self-delusion- in the long run these are the only people who count... Robert Heinlein

  7. #23
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    6,872

    Re: Scientifc Evidence Refutes Atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by LogicallyYours View Post
    Wow...so much wrong with your analysis. Did you actually watch the video?

    The concept of fine tuning is based on perspective. The faithful look at the current state of the universe, and in their fixed, unable to change paradigm because their book dictates the outcome, view the results as made for them.

    Science, however, examines the results without the biased dictates of the book and weighs the evidence on its own merits and then follows to where it leads. It doesn't identify the destination and then cherry-pick the evidence or discard the evidence that doesn't work.



    Wow...you think so highly of your capacity to debate and reason, you feel you're in a position to condescend? How when you can't actually defend your position?

    You just can't seem to grasp that, attacking science in no way proves your position...you need to present positive evidence that supports your position. You haven't and you can't. You are unable to present evidence for supernatural creation AND you are unable to present evidence for a supernatural being.

    Perhaps you should forgo the gym and spend more time in the library.
    You people have a huge problem. If can't win an argument with facts and logic, you lie.

    I watched that video again and found my analysis was correct! In a normal universe, a third party would intervene and render a decision. However on scam.com there are no independent third parties, just blood thirty atheist waiting to bounce.

    Henceforth, I am leaving the forum. Not because I am defeated, but because I am tired of dishonest atheist. It's possible to be an honest atheist, but most of them are not on scam.com

    Then, there is Ghost Dog. His response is atheistic psycho babble. Here is my summary of Ghost Dog.

    "You pathetic mislead person. How dare you question our values, how dare you believe in God. You must have a psychological problem. For certain, you are either crazy, childish, or just plan stupid." Is that a fair assessment?

    But, there's Thistle. A man with sincere doubts willing to "truly consider the evidenced." At least he doesn't lie. He's a respectable foe.

    I came back hoping to have a fair debate. Wow was I disillusioned! I admit to being naive. Evidently, dedicated atheist never give up the cause.

    Oh, I know, atheist will reply, I am a fanatic. Well, that may be partly true. I believe God did it. However, I came back hoping to have an honest exchange. Knowing more about science than most atheist, I opened up the old "prove a natural cause explanation argument." Well that was a mistake. Atheist on scam.com entered the fray with mostly hostile comments, and . . . . Well, No use belaboring the obvious.

    Henceforth, I'll find better things to do with my spare time.
    Last edited by Cnance; 06-25-2012 at 10:02 AM.

  8. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    6,557

    Re: Scientifc Evidence Refutes Atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gazza. View Post
    How can one say that the Universe was created by something with a mind and intelligence before such a thing existed and if it did exist, exactly where did it exist, if not within the Universe?

    Atheism, like religion, doesn't need to be proven by science or any other means.

    Atheism, like religion, is a belief.

    The only difference between Atheists and religious people is that religious people believe that something exists and Atheists believe that something doesn't.


    .
    And the thing is, Cnance is obsessed with "Atheists" and thinks everyone who argues with him over science is an Atheist. I certainly am, but many aren't.

    Most Christians would make the same argument against Cnance's position as I do - he cannot demand science must explain everything, yet never apply the same standards to his own explanation.

    Religion is about FAITH, evidence is not required, it cannot be where the supernatural is concerned. Science is about evidence only. Keep them seperate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance
    Henceforth, I'll find better things to do with my spare time.
    Probably for the best.

  9. #25
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: Scientifc Evidence Refutes Atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    You people have a huge problem. If can't win an argument with facts and logic, you lie.

    I watched that video again and found my analysis was correct! In a normal universe, a third party would intervene and render a decision. However on scam.com there are no independent third parties, just blood thirty atheist waiting to bounce.

    Henceforth, I am leaving the forum. Not because I am defeated, but because I am tired of dishonest atheist. It's possible to be an honest atheist, but most of them are not on scam.com

    Then, there is Ghost Dog. His response is atheistic psycho babble. Here is my summary of Ghost Dog.

    "You pathetic mislead person. How dare you question our values, how dare you believe in God. You must have a psychological problem. For certain, you are either crazy, childish, or just plan stupid." Is that a fair assessment?

    Then, there's Thistle. A man with sincere doubts willing to "truly consider the evidenced." At least he doesn't lie. He's a respectable foe.

    I came back hoping to have a fair debate. Wow was I disillusioned! I admit to being naive. Evidently, dedicated atheist never give up the cause.

    Oh, I know, atheist will reply, I am a fanatic. Well, that may be partly true. I believe God did it. However, I came back hoping to have an honest exchange. Knowing more about science than most atheist, I opened up the old "prove a natural cause explanation argument." Well that was a mistake. Atheist on scam.com entered the fray with mostly hostile comments, and . . . . Well, No use belaboring the obvious.

    Henceforth, I'll find better things to do with my spare time.
    Throwing in the towel? Bye, bitch.
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  10. #26
    Lord_jag's Avatar
    Lord_jag is offline I am God because I say I am. Prove me wrong.
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,796

    Re: Scientifc Evidence Refutes Atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by nomaxim View Post
    You Made this post (per my time) at 06-21-2012, 12:55 AM.

    So, let's look at the sequence here.


    Posted at 06-21-2012, 08:19 PM and contains a link to a 5 minute video.

    One (1) hour and 5 minutes later I post;


    So, not only did I have enough time to watch this 5 min. video (13 times) but my two links contain around 10 hours of video.

    Then only 3 hours and 31 minutes later you post;

    Umm, I had enough time to watch your video 13 times. You did not even have enough time to watch a third of my videos.

    And you post this?;

    And you wonder why people refer to you as a hypocrite and idiot.
    (clicks the "Like" button)
    A real, honest, falsifiable claim made b.y Seer of dreams:(2011)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I believe there will be a nuclear war in October of this year.
    Oh Cnance.... Full of shit as always.

  11. #27
    Lord_jag's Avatar
    Lord_jag is offline I am God because I say I am. Prove me wrong.
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,796

    Re: Scientific Evidence Refutes Atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    Evidence is mounting against atheism.

    Here's a scientific argument for God as the creator of the universe.

    I just watched the video.... 22 seconds of telling us what we're about to see, and then a huge block of text telling us exactly why people laugh at creationists.

    "According to science, the big bang theory best explains the origin of our universe more than any other theory."


    Yeah okay, I'll accept that.

    "The theory proposes that the universe had a beginning and is not eternal."

    No. No it does not.

    "It also says that before the beginning of the universe there was nothing (this means no time, no space and no sound)"

    No.... It says none of that at all where the hell are your creationist friends getting this crap?

    "and then the universe came to be somehow."

    Somehow.... Nice touch. Way to oversimplify something you make no effort to understand.

    "The theory says that after the energy and matter that make up our universe came forth, they were concentrated in a tiny point. From this tiny point everything expanded and galaxies were eventually created."

    Wow... Just wow. Way to swing the time scale from picoseconds to trillions of years in one sentence.

    There's absolutely no need to go anywhere past 23 seconds into your video. The maker obviously has made no more effort to understand what he is criticizing than you ever have.

    That block of text where creationists summarize the big bang theory is concrete proof that you have no desire to understand anything.
    A real, honest, falsifiable claim made b.y Seer of dreams:(2011)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I believe there will be a nuclear war in October of this year.
    Oh Cnance.... Full of shit as always.

  12. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    26

    Re: Scientifc Evidence Refutes Atheism.

    Atheism is a binary question. It makes no assertions or claims.

    Do you believe in a god? Yes or no.

    How can you claim scientific evidence for the imaterial?

    First, the Big band theory does not claim the univers came from nothing. The anser is "we don't know". Aside from a super dumbed down version of what the model explains, the claim is incorrect.

    "Light and sound" from the big bang? In space, no one can hear you scream and Microwave radiation is not exactly 'light', unless you have x-ray vision.

    Theories are based on observation and evidence. No body has ever been to the sun, but we can be pretty sure what it is by measuring it from earth. Back around 200 B.C. Eratosthenes determined the diameter of the sun to within 2%.

    So then the video takes a jump to Atheists, from Scientist to Atheist, nice. Space-time is a mathematical model, not a 'thing'. Time is one dimension and space is 3.. Space-time is independent of vacuum.

    So is it logic or math that states you cannot get something from nothing?

    No reasonable conclusion, that asserting a conclusion. Argument from ignorance. You assert order and complexity because your brain (what's left of it) looks for patterns. So when see a hurricane on this planet, depending on where you stand on the planet, it will rotate one way or the other. Because they are designed by God to deliver judgement on people? No. The Coriolis effect is responsible. So, it's the natural laws that give the appearance of order and complexity in our 1 universe.

    The universe "Fine tuning argument"? Really? In order for that argument to work, considering that they are talking about probability you need more than one universe to compare. So the probability of the argument is 1.

    "Most physicists and cosmologists" Cite references please.
    "Universe is in a state of equilibrium" in 500 Million years, Andromeda is going to butt slam the Milky Way as a demonstration of the 'equilibrium'.
    I lost count of the 'insert god here' argument from ignorance points.

    In Spiderman comics, they mention New York City. New York City is real, the places in the comic is real, the times are real. Does this make Spiderman a more believable character?

    Citing the 'books outside the bible', no historical scholar with any shred of dignity agrees there is any historical evidence outside the bible for Jesus. Let alone the claim he is a god is real or not.

    Daniel prophecy, My Dilbert calendar has better prophetic ability than the bible does. At least I've actually met Catbert.

  13. #29
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: Scientifc Evidence Refutes Atheism.

    All of which has been pointed out to the incredibly intellectually dishonest, Cnance.
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

  14. #30
    Lord_jag's Avatar
    Lord_jag is offline I am God because I say I am. Prove me wrong.
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    2,796

    Re: Scientifc Evidence Refutes Atheism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    Then, there is Ghost Dog. His response is atheistic psycho babble. Here is my summary of Ghost Dog.

    "You pathetic mislead person. How dare you question our values, how dare you believe in God. You must have a psychological problem. For certain, you are either crazy, childish, or just plan stupid." Is that a fair assessment?
    I think the real answer is "All of the above."

    You are, without a doubt, clinically delusional. You cannot tell reality from dreams.

    You are incapable of having an adult conversation, so you are acting childish.

    And you are incapable of learning new information - the definition of stupidity.

    Yes I think that is a fair assessment.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    But, there's Thistle. A man with sincere doubts willing to "truly consider the evidenced." At least he doesn't lie. He's a respectable foe.
    Ah... and there's the catch. You see a debate as a fight, and other debaters as your "foes". A debate isn't a fight. Repeating your same misguided rhetoric isn't the same is repeatedly hitting someone in the kidneys.

    If this was a fight, your points would be like you missing repeatedly for years and thinking that you're wearing down your opponent. You were wrong the first hundred times you said "God is the default" and you're still wrong.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I came back hoping to have a fair debate. Wow was I disillusioned! I admit to being naive. Evidently, dedicated atheist never give up the cause.
    And.... here comes the real lie. You came back here to find someone to believe your delusion. Someone who would convince you that your not losing your mind. Sorry, but you are the only one with these delusions. You are on the brink of a psychotic break, and you really should seek professional help.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    Henceforth, I'll find better things to do with my spare time.
    Oh good. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
    A real, honest, falsifiable claim made b.y Seer of dreams:(2011)
    Quote Originally Posted by Cnance View Post
    I believe there will be a nuclear war in October of this year.
    Oh Cnance.... Full of shit as always.

  15. #31
    LogicallyYours's Avatar
    LogicallyYours is offline Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    6,352

    Re: Scientifc Evidence Refutes Atheism.

    Saddle up your dino!....lets go!
    "Religion is a heavy suitcase: all you have to do is put it down."
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    "I have read the bible...more than once. I was not impressed nor was I so moved to give up my ability to think for myself and surrender my knowledge of facts for the unfounded belief in a mythical sky-fairy." - Me.

Similar Threads

  1. Americans and Atheism....???
    By ohein56 in forum Religious Scams
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-27-2014, 12:35 PM
  2. Atheism and Mass Murder
    By pwrone in forum Political Scams
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: 07-26-2011, 10:21 AM
  3. Let's make Atheism a religion!
    By Lord_jag in forum Religious Scams
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 02-14-2011, 08:18 PM
  4. Atheism is a lie
    By Cnance in forum Religious Scams
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 02-11-2011, 06:56 AM
  5. Atheism discussion
    By svcguyhv in forum Religious Scams
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 07-30-2009, 10:50 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may edit your posts
  •