'Good without a god': Faces of atheis...

'Good without a god': Faces of atheism in Oklahoma

There are 7527 comments on the NewsOK.com story from Jul 5, 2013, titled 'Good without a god': Faces of atheism in Oklahoma. In it, NewsOK.com reports that:

Rebecca Vitsmun is shown during an interview with a CNN reporter shortly after the May 20 tornado that destroyed her Moore home.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at NewsOK.com.

antiatheist

Seminole, OK

#6295 Mar 22, 2014
Evolution occurs within a species. Not from one species to another. Too many people, including some Christians, are trying to find ways to make God fit into science. They come at it from a worldly perspective instead of a biblical one.

Chromium love how you run from all the scientific hoaxes over the years. I guarantee you that I could write an article, totally making things up, and you would totally believe it if it supported what you already believe to be true. Thats how gullible you are

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#6296 Mar 22, 2014
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
Why can't y'all just say "Wow, God must use evolutionary processes to differentiate species" and we could all move on. Why do you have try and smear Science? You don't know how God does things. It's 'more mysterious than you can comprehend' or some such nonsense.
You know that answer. Other religions and countries just shrug or nod and move on. Evolution isn't any threat or challenge against God - it's just >insecurities and fears< in our Bible belt that keeps the controversy fired up.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#6297 Mar 22, 2014
antiatheist wrote:
Evolution occurs within a species. Not from one species to another. Too many people, including some Christians, are trying to find ways to make God fit into science. They come at it from a worldly perspective instead of a biblical one.
Chromium love how you run from all the scientific hoaxes over the years. I guarantee you that I could write an article, totally making things up, and you would totally believe it if it supported what you already believe to be true. Thats how gullible you are
Evolution occurs within a species. With enough changes, the tree of life gets a new branch. How is that so difficult for you to grasp? Why do you harbor so much hatred and contempt of logic, science and the non-religious? Some childhood trauma? Did your atheist 9th grade science teacher rebuff your advances?
If you wrote an article, totally making things up - how would that differ from the correspondence you have been posting here? It would support what I already believe to be true - that your opinions and viewpoints are not to be trusted.
Still waiting for your many, many contemporary records of Jesus list, btw.
So What

Newalla, OK

#6298 Mar 22, 2014
antiatheist wrote:
Do I really need to give you the long, long list of scientific hoaxes throughout the years that people like you fell for? The problem is there are a few people that wrap their agenda in science which turns out not to be science at all. You guys will support ANYTHING that you think proves evolution.
LOL! Do I really need to remind you that you posted a report from a religious web site that supports the theory of evolution. And the Bible is full of Hebrew misnomers?

Evolution doesn't need support. Evolution supports itself. You should stick with your post that proves that, and move on with your life.

Be sure to icon me! Remember; I like peanuts, but don't like spam, and I prefer the lights be off.
EdSed

Hamilton, UK

#6299 Mar 22, 2014
Interesting post NS.

Additionally, I'll mention that some misleading theories aren't motivated by any wish to mislead. Reasonable but misleading scientific theories like phlogiston...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phlogiston_theor...
took many decades to thoroughly debunk to the satisfaction of almost everyone.

That scientific method and critical thinking lead to better, more sound understanding of the physical and natural world really shouldn't need saying.

It is interesting how many religionists feel threatened by science and evolution....
https://www.google.co.uk/search...
I sometimes think they'd have us back in the dark ages if they could.

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution
antiatheist

Seminole, OK

#6300 Mar 22, 2014
CNN is a religious website? That article supports evolution? So what do you actually read what you write? I'm embarrassed for you.

Judged:

22

22

20

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#6301 Mar 22, 2014
EdSed wrote:
Interesting post NS.
Additionally, I'll mention that some misleading theories aren't motivated by any wish to mislead. Reasonable but misleading scientific theories like phlogiston...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phlogiston_theor...
took many decades to thoroughly debunk to the satisfaction of almost everyone.
That scientific method and critical thinking lead to better, more sound understanding of the physical and natural world really shouldn't need saying.
It is interesting how many religionists feel threatened by science and evolution....
https://www.google.co.uk/search...
I sometimes think they'd have us back in the dark ages if they could.
http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution
Indeed, the history of science includes many controversies between competing theories, each with its stalwart advocates, that took much time and effort to resolve. In each case, ideas that had gained at least some measure of acceptance were consigned to that history's dustbin, and their champions had to either move on or get left behind. I'm not sure which is harder for serious scholars, to admit that an adversary is right or to forgive them for it. Scientists are not immune to the psychological malady known colloquially as "sour grapes."

Thus, discredited theories and hoaxes, intentional or not, often linger on as "fringe science," sometimes becoming imbedded into culture as folk tales like the abominable snowman, bigfoot/sasquatch, or el chupacabra. In particular, locals find it hard to accept the loss of authenticity for artifacts that bring attention to their regions and towns--note the A V M and Kensington Runestones, the Bat Creek Inscription, and the Beardmore reics (I'm up to the Bs in the list of archeological forgeries).

I know how they feel. I was sorely disappointed to learn that a runic stone that confirmed an apocryphal tale about one of my ancestors also turned out to be a forgery. It's a good story even if it didn't actually happen, but all the same...
So What

Newalla, OK

#6302 Mar 22, 2014
antiatheist wrote:
CNN is a religious website? That article supports evolution? So what do you actually read what you write? I'm embarrassed for you.
LOL! Do you read what you post before you post it? Or do you troll yourself also? The web page you posted about is called BELIEF BLOG. It is a CNN web page about RELGION. You should read it before you take it to church tomorrow, so that you will understand why they are laughing at you.
So What

Newalla, OK

#6303 Mar 22, 2014
NightSerf wrote:
<quoted text>
Indeed, the history of science includes many controversies between competing theories, each with its stalwart advocates, that took much time and effort to resolve. In each case, ideas that had gained at least some measure of acceptance were consigned to that history's dustbin, and their champions had to either move on or get left behind. I'm not sure which is harder for serious scholars, to admit that an adversary is right or to forgive them for it. Scientists are not immune to the psychological malady known colloquially as "sour grapes."
Thus, discredited theories and hoaxes, intentional or not, often linger on as "fringe science," sometimes becoming imbedded into culture as folk tales like the abominable snowman, bigfoot/sasquatch, or el chupacabra. In particular, locals find it hard to accept the loss of authenticity for artifacts that bring attention to their regions and towns--note the A V M and Kensington Runestones, the Bat Creek Inscription, and the Beardmore reics (I'm up to the Bs in the list of archeological forgeries).
I know how they feel. I was sorely disappointed to learn that a runic stone that confirmed an apocryphal tale about one of my ancestors also turned out to be a forgery. It's a good story even if it didn't actually happen, but all the same...
The Shroud of Turin deserves to be recognized in The Hall of Famous Religious Farces.

What makes it a farce is how it was protected from being studied. Should trying to prove a religious artifact to be genuine not, be considered blasphemy?

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#6304 Mar 22, 2014
So What wrote:
<quoted text>The Shroud of Turin deserves to be recognized in The Hall of Famous Religious Farces.
What makes it a farce is how it was protected from being studied. Should trying to prove a religious artifact to be genuine not, be considered blasphemy?
Some beliefs about the Shroud fall into the category of "fringe science," in that it has been invalidated but is clung out of belief-driven desperation. the same people tend to believe in at lease some of the following: extraterrestrial aliens among us, bigfoot, chemtrails, that Obama is an Islamic foreigner, and conspiracy theory in general. Some probably believe that Obama was sired by an alien and bigfoot in Nigeria and farts chemtrails. Gullibility, it would seem, is without limitation.
antiatheist

Seminole, OK

#6305 Mar 22, 2014
"it is a CNN web page"

And you think CNN is a religious website? Please also tell me how that article supports evolution.

Judged:

26

26

22

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
Trailerqueen

United States

#6306 Mar 22, 2014
D
U
M
B
F
U
C
K
S
So What

Newalla, OK

#6307 Mar 22, 2014
antiatheist wrote:
"it is a CNN web page"
And you think CNN is a religious website? Please also tell me how that article supports evolution.
Your truculent and vacuous nature has become improvident of my time.
antiatheist

Seminole, OK

#6309 Mar 22, 2014
still waiting for you to back up your claim that the article helps prove evolution and that CNN is a religious website.

“See how you are?”

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#6310 Mar 22, 2014
antiatheist wrote:
still waiting for you to back up your claim that the article helps prove evolution and that CNN is a religious website.
It was a religious blog posted on a page of the CNN website. Are you always this dishonestly manipulative and prone to distortion? Oh, right. It's a "faith" thing I "wouldn't understand." Nevermind.
So What

Newalla, OK

#6311 Mar 22, 2014
antiatheist wrote:
still waiting for you to back up your claim that the article helps prove evolution and that CNN is a religious website.
What grammatical constituent can you not substantiate about my last post?

I also can use Socratic method, but I'm not being evasive like you, I'm lampooning your demeanor.
antiatheist

Seminole, OK

#6312 Mar 22, 2014
It was a special to CNN and a part of their website. It was not an independent religious website like "so what" claimed. It also never was used in any way to support a belief in evolution as "so what" also claimed. So what makes statements without thinking first and then can't swallow his/her pride and admit he/she was wrong which is typical of an atheist. Its so much fun pointing out how pathetic you guys are. Its also surprisingly easy

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#6313 Mar 23, 2014
antiatheist wrote:
It was a special to CNN and a part of their website. It was not an independent religious website like "so what" claimed. It also never was used in any way to support a belief in evolution as "so what" also claimed. So what makes statements without thinking first and then can't swallow his/her pride and admit he/she was wrong which is typical of an atheist. Its so much fun pointing out how pathetic you guys are. Its also surprisingly easy
What is surprising is how many simultaneous levels you can delude yourself. What a peculiar 'talent'. Were you born with it or was it acquired? Perhaps it EVOLVED when skeptical people who do not march in step with your world-view were introduced into your environment via the Internet.

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

#6314 Mar 23, 2014
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>
You know that answer. Other religions and countries just shrug or nod and move on. Evolution isn't any threat or challenge against God - it's just >insecurities and fears< in our Bible belt that keeps the controversy fired up.
I know. But ... I feel it is our duty to try and help them.
Mcloud Proud

Newalla, OK

#6315 Mar 23, 2014
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
I know. But ... I feel it is our duty to try and help them.
Have you ever heard the saying "misery loves company"? That's Antiatheist's agenda, not religion. Antiathist gets enjoyment out of irritating others.

But I'm sure that if Antiathist didn't find company here, someone else in Antiathist's life would suffer even more, so you just might be helping someone else without knowing it.

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.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 6 min An NFL Fan 20,112
Christianity isn't based on... (Feb '10) 18 min NightSerf 32
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 27 min One way or another 35,197
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 27 min ChristineM 14,944
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 29 min ChristineM 255,514
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 33 min NightSerf 3,714
News a€‹GORMAN: Science is a religion 1 hr hpcaban 2
More from around the web