Atheism requires as much faith as religion?

Atheism requires as much faith as religion? bearvspuma : The only problem with this rationalization is that ita s assuming all athiests are so because theya re intelligent in the ways of science and reasoning and all people that believe in a form of god are unintelligent. Full Story

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#177209 Sep 12, 2013
every game wrote:
<quoted text>
Inability to refute reported.
Nope-- you lied-- I was not reported.

Why do you lie?

Oh!

Because you must-- lying is all you have.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#177210 Sep 12, 2013
blacklagoon wrote:
<quoted text>Not sure Bob, I remember thinking it was a very nice quote and wrote it down. Very true isn't it!!!
Yep.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#177211 Sep 12, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
That is because your statement is too stupid to be worthy of a response. The fact you go on, is the difference between you being an idiot, and being a stubborn idiot.
Nothing in the above? Constitutes an actual argument.

But there is plenty of belittling and name-calling.

Sad.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#177212 Sep 12, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
The only thing that has been provable in this tread is your third grade reading comprehension if that. I would love to see how much spell check saves you. After noting your failed reading comprehension I should expect something as stupid as "Religion has never had any interest in science."
Nothing in the above? Constitutes an actual argument.

But there is plenty of belittling and name-calling.

Sad.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#177213 Sep 12, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
That was Stephen Hawkins, did you catch the last paragraph. What's up stupid. You could deny forever
Do you know what a QUOTE MINE is?

No?

Google it-- using a **PARTIAL**QUOTE** of Stephen Hawkings is LYING.

It's what you do.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#177214 Sep 12, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
Stephen "The World's Smartest Man" Hawking, in your face loser. Now give me your duh duh duh response denier.
Taking a snippet of something someone says, and then making that snippet SEEM TO SAY THE EXACT OPPOSITE?

Is a LIE. It's called "quote mining".

It's what your lying video did.

You are a liar.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#177215 Sep 12, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
It does make the victory so much sweeter. Little Red Bobbing Hood could not take my word for it, that Mr Hawking, and I admit at first I did spell his name wrong. Admitted that it could not be proven god does not exist. Babbling Bob is so stupid even after Cambridge's highest professor, the keeper of The Chair, has set him straight. He says "that's not proof." What a dolt.
Nope. Your lying video used QUOTE MINES.

But I see your name-calling continues.

And you? You did not win-- you lost, and badly.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#177216 Sep 12, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
Mr Hawking nor myself denies evolution. I do disagree with some details others have, that THEY CAN'T PROVE. The monkey in the middle. If we came from a tree primate. 1. Our feet would be much different then they are. 2. We would be so much more stronger and faster. We'd be able to beat the 50 pound monkey that could rip us to shreds. You are a fool for trying to put words in my mouth or thoughts in my head. As Orwell claimed you would, worm meat.
Your video? Was a flat lie-- by using a short snippet, it LIED.

That is what you are doing above-- you are LYING.

It's what you do best.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#177217 Sep 12, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
And he was right. The universe (meaning the current expansion phase) had a beginning. That beginning was also when time began. So there was no 'time before the Big Bang'. Check to see what Hawking said in more detail.
It clearly says energy exist before The Universe. Energy being God. Don't confuse this with when Hawking and others say there was no human form, that Christians worship as God. Even after making such a statement. That can not be proven wrong. I continue to tell you I am not Christian, however I can't tell Christians I can prove they are wrong about God. Some of the details of wiser atheist than the ones that post here, I do agree with. They attack details of the scripture. In some cases it is misunderstanding. With in the scripture itself is warning of false prophets. There really are good people out there that do break down and analyze the writings. I think what you have here is a "I can deny anything and everything cult."

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#177218 Sep 12, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
I do agree he is, even though he side steps the question. That is what makes that video a slam dunk. The Hawking debate will all ways be there, was he an atheist, or was he keeping his sponsors happy? I off course will take the man for his word.
The debate on Christian creationism vs Atheism and God and evolution vs Atheism is two different animals. The bloggers here are left behind.
Indeed-- you **are** left behind.

Your lying video uses quote-mines to LIE.

It's a classic True Believerô lying technique.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#177219 Sep 12, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing in the above? Constitutes an actual argument.
But there is plenty of belittling and name-calling.
Sad.
The reason there is no argument is because, there is no way you could prove your point. I am stunned you even try.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#177220 Sep 12, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Nothing in the above? Constitutes an actual argument.
But there is plenty of belittling and name-calling.
Sad.
I do think it is constructive criticism. I am not sure if your reading comprehension could be saved. I think it all started because you take no one's word for anything. When your teachers corrected your book reports you thought it was due to political agendas or something along that line instead, of the teacher doing what his job was.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#177221 Sep 12, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you know what a QUOTE MINE is?
No?
Google it-- using a **PARTIAL**QUOTE** of Stephen Hawkings is LYING.
It's what you do.
Hawking lying, that is just stupid. He puts a lot into what he does and deserves respect for it. He has called things against my beliefs and I don't go on as you are. It's silly.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#177222 Sep 12, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope. Your lying video used QUOTE MINES.
But I see your name-calling continues.
And you? You did not win-- you lost, and badly.
That will be the day now you'll post something and it will out do Stephen Hawking. It's not just that you have bad reading comprehension, it's also you have no respect for the topic. You really need to read up on Religion's interest in science throughout history. You have no clue how stupid that comment was. And yes, I look stupid for continuing on with someone that would say such a thing.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#177223 Sep 12, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
The portion of the universe *we can see today*. There is more to the universe than what we can see today. The region we can see today was millimeters across at that point. The whole universe was larger.
There was no leading edge because every place in the universe looks the same at any given time. This is fundamental in the model.
Let's make this simple. Let's say everything that formed our visible universe was in a sphere 10 mm in diameter.

Then Poof!!!! or less, let's say it expanded to fill this solar system.

How did the surface of that sphere get out to past Pluto? Let's say the interior surface, because that is what we would see looking outward.

The BBT says space was created with that expansion. We are back to the volume thing again, which is a most important component of our reality.

You know I have a different idea of what this existence is, but I would like you to explain that in the physical sense based upon the physics we accept as physical and built a model of the BBT on.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#177224 Sep 12, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Your video? Was a flat lie-- by using a short snippet, it LIED.
That is what you are doing above-- you are LYING.
It's what you do best.
Good luck finding that missing link. When you do I'll congratulate. It will be cool, you'll bark "I showed you Robert Stevens". Bob really that's not happening. Why you guys go with that stupid theory is beyond me, but happy hunting. BTW, before you start check out your feet, and the monkey's feet. It may be a good idea to invest your time and cash in another endeavor. just saying.

“Robert Stevens”

Since: Dec 08

Jersey City , NJ

#177225 Sep 12, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Indeed-- you **are** left behind.
Your lying video uses quote-mines to LIE.
It's a classic True Believerô lying technique.
really do think the atheist I use to talk to would ask you, and two other atheist that have been posting, to please shut up. The idea you could prove "no" existence of God. Most atheist would make no effort at all. Those are the wiser ones.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#177226 Sep 12, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
The reason there is no argument is because, there is no way you could prove your point. I am stunned you even try.
I proved-- to as high as you like-- that your view of god is simply impossible in our universe.

You didn't try, because you cannot.

You **literally** have **nothing** to contribute, here.

Apart from your constant name-calling and attempts to put people down.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#177227 Sep 12, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
I do think it is constructive criticism. I am not sure if your reading comprehension could be saved. I think it all started because you take no one's word for anything. When your teachers corrected your book reports you thought it was due to political agendas or something along that line instead, of the teacher doing what his job was.
More put-downs. More belittling.

No arguments of any kind.

It's all you do.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#177228 Sep 12, 2013
Robert Stevens wrote:
<quoted text>
Hawking lying, that is just stupid.
You don't read-- do you?

You actually DO NOT READ what was written.

I said your video was a QUOTE MINE:

It **made** Stephen Hawking **appear** to lie-- when he wasn't.

But by using a PARTIAL QUOTE? Your lying video made him **SEEM** to say what he NEVER ACTUALLY SAID.

Lies.

It's what you do.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

NCAA Basketball Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 13 min Bluestater 1,153,944
Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) 1 hr Cowobunga 201,164
UCLA FOOTBALL NOTEBOOK: Neuheisel says Prince w... (Sep '10) 6 hr Trojan 28,382
Thousands Protest Roe V. Wade Decision (Jan '08) 6 hr Pearl Jam 306,974
Should child beauty pageants be banned? 10 hr Roy the Boy 686
What role do you think humans play in global wa... Thu Earth inhabited 2,663
Conn's Appliances (Nov '07) Dec 16 The Real Daniel S... 281
More from around the web