Don't dictate beliefs

Sep 5, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: The Star Press

No one else can say otherwise? That is basically saying those who do "believe in God" are better? Hardly.

Comments (Page 477)

Showing posts 9,521 - 9,540 of11,195
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10035
Jan 3, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
The Catholic church gave us the scientific method, they figured out a perfect method for exposing fraudulent miracles and eventually how to apply it in many areas, resulting in the coined term "scientific method."
Unlike you, we give credit where due, they gave everyone a great tool, they get credit for that. They also accept that it's a very accurate tool, which you provided a lot of evidence to help demonstrate how well the method works, thanks for showing that it works well. It's not surprising that they accept what the method produces. So your dishonest attempt at painting with a broad brush fails, as usual.
Although your statements are false, it's still interesting that you're another supporter of the Catholic church.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10036
Jan 3, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's a less sensationalized version of the story that actually uses scientific language and those pesky facts:
http://www.nature.com/news/2009/091021/full/4...
You are the ones using that "missing link" nonsense, that's not even a scientific term. You should also stop posting things that destroy your entire position, just a bit of advice. But thank you for showing me that the scientific community is better at catching frauds than I had originally thought.
It requires a very strong faith to believe in fraudulent science. I commend you for having that kind of unfaltering faith.

You're an unusual Catholic.

Are you a member of a peer-review group?

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10037
Jan 3, 2013
 
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmmm I didn't realize that the atheist church had Nones! Do they have the flying None? How about none convents?
LOL
LOL.

Kitten might be our forum's flying “none”.

I think she stays kind of “high” on something, judging by her bizarre posts.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10038
Jan 3, 2013
 
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you have made *CLAIMS* that they are fraudulent and wrong, but you have NOT shown these claims to be true. In fact, the evidence shows *your* claims are wrong. Since you didn't actually claim to do any research (or any thinking), what you posted isn't fraudulent, only wrong. But any *scientist* that made truth claims (as opposed to simple speculation) like yours with so little actual evidence would be laughed out of the profession.
The government doesn't waste time laughing at fraudulent scientists......they send them to prison.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10039
Jan 3, 2013
 
Adam wrote:
<quoted text>
As an ex-C I know the bible well, too well. Without Jesus glasses, the OT is a cataloge of horrors, and mythology. The NT starts out well. But strip away the myths, and you a less palatable story.
A brief synopsis. A man rises from the dead and ascends into heaven on a cloud (acts 1). You are saved by eating his flesh and drinking his blood (John 6). That my friend is insane.
You never were a Christian.

You were an unconvincing hypocrite.

Now you're an unconvincing atheist.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10041
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

If Charles Darwin found it so hard to convince his counterparts of his fraudulent theory in his own day and time, why are so many saps living today convinced that his theory is “gospel”?

And why did Darwin leave out part of his findings? To make the part he left in more believable?

Darwin thought life kept evolving. When are humans going to evolve into something higher?

Or is it now time for humans to devolve?

Isaac Newton's theory proposed that what goes up must come down.

Hmmmm – inconsistency in science.

Perhaps the primitive brain of the atheist holds the gene that may have already started the devolving process.

When seen in that perspective, evolution is almost believable, lol.

http://arthurstace.blogspot.com/2010/02/darwi...

No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10042
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The twin theories, atheism and evolution, are blatant contradictions.

Brady Lenardos explains when he writes on deterministic necessity.

Everything in our galaxy and all galaxies “just happened” to be in position exactly as they are to work together as they do?

Wow!!! BANG BANG BANG – all just “fell into place”...

LMAO

http://www.ucapologetics.com/atheism1.htm

No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10043
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Did sedimentation always occur at the same rate it does today?

How do we know?

If not, what does that do to dating methods?

What about polystrate fossils?

http://creation.com/how-old-is-the-earth

No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10044
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

How much faith does atheism require?

Even in science, don't we need a certain degree of faith in their findings?

Or do we just accept all science, knowing that much of it is fraudulent?

Haven't we found errors in science?

Yes – I've posted many of those.

Is damage to the spinal cord reversible?

Yes it is - but science told us no for many years.

http://theseekeroftruth.blogspot.com/2005/07/...

No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10045
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
I recognise that there will always be fraudsters who are dumb enough to use science ...
Yes; thank you.

You also recognize that science has failed to catch their own crimiinals. At the cost of the taxpayer, the government does what science should be doing.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10046
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Khatru wrote:
<quoted text>
I love the way correct use of grammar winds you people up.
I'll just carry on referring to the god of the Bible in this way.
Since you are powerless to diminish God in any way, feel free to continue diminishing yourself with improper grammar and spelling. We're accustomed to it by now.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10047
Jan 3, 2013
 
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
But as we know, you just descended from a common rodent. Read about those too. And learn more about fraudulent evolution. Your support of the ignorance of your cohorts exhibits your own ignorance more than you have already done for us. Take a break because I think you're tired.
You keep claiming it's fraudulent yet you provide no better alternative .... well you provide no alternative actually. You also provide no evidence that there is fraud involved. If you think it's fraudulent you should have some evidence for your assertion.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10048
Jan 3, 2013
 
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes; thank you.
You also recognize that science has failed to catch their own crimiinals. At the cost of the taxpayer, the government does what science should be doing.
Every single scientific fraud that you posted was exposed by the scientific method and disgraced by the scientific community. No one else has exposed the fraud. So your own evidence, your own links, your own sources, all of them, simply prove you wrong.
Adam

Stoke-on-trent, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10049
Jan 3, 2013
 
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
You never were a Christian.
You were an unconvincing hypocrite.
Now you're an unconvincing atheist.
I drank from the kool aid and lived to tell the tale.

btw I am am agnostic and skeptic. I still remain open to the possibility of an impersonal deity. But on what evidence?
Adam

Stoke-on-trent, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10050
Jan 3, 2013
 
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
I some religious nut approached you and said "I am the son of God, believe in me and you will have eternal life. Unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood you will have no life in you." What would be your reaction?

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10051
Jan 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
I was wondering where your link is that backs you up. It seems to be missing, lol.
How many Christians do you know personally that discuss their beliefs with you in detail so that you can decide what the “vast majority” of them believe? LOL
The majority of soldiers, policemen, firemen in America are Christians. Nothing will change that fact, so you are going to have to live with it, even though it's painful for you.
Basically, atheists don't have a voice. When they try to get one, they damage their cause because they emit hate and foul smelling gasses, lol.
The American public at large isn't interested in the atheist view – praise God.
I'm sharing a supposition based upon observation and personal experience. Given my weight in the community, I would think this would be far more convincing than a mere "link". I can certainly testify that during my entire period of religious indoctrination, I was miserable and inattentivie. Since I know that I am in no way "special" it should be safe to presume that many millions of my fellow indoctrinatees were likewise miserable and inattentive.
Thinking

Huntingdon, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10052
Jan 3, 2013
 
I may change my mind tomorrow... ;)
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
You say it's Thursday too? Wow, that explains why I'm an atheist.

“Blue Collar Philosopher”

Since: Nov 08

Texas, USA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10053
Jan 3, 2013
 
derek4 wrote:
How much faith does atheism require?
Even in science, don't we need a certain degree of faith in their findings?
Or do we just accept all science, knowing that much of it is fraudulent?
Haven't we found errors in science?
Yes – I've posted many of those.
Is damage to the spinal cord reversible?
Yes it is - but science told us no for many years.
http://theseekeroftruth.blogspot.com/2005/07/...
No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.
Wise men have pointed out to me that TRUST is the "faith" analog in Science. Scientists trust their instruments, trust their co-workers and trust the Scientific Method to weed out error. Very occasionally, the trust is misplaced, to the apparent delight of you godbots. Of course, the analogy breaks down as scientists have very good reason to trust these things, whereas godbots have no basis for their "faith".

No matter what people say, knowledge and faith are mortal enemies and can not really exist in the same Universe together. When you "know" something, faith is unnecessary. You can only have "faith" in something that does not exist, proof or knowledge of that thing is impossible. That's why anti-knowledge or misinformation, such as your Creationism and anti-evolution, anti-science poses are brandished about ... you got nothing else.

If your god existed, you could all pray and "wish us into the corn field" but he don't and you can't. Yeah, I watched the Twilight Zone Marathon again ... what'd you do for New Year? Sacrifice a goat or something?

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10054
Jan 3, 2013
 
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
Since you are powerless to diminish God in any way, feel free to continue diminishing yourself with improper grammar and spelling. We're accustomed to it by now.
Creationist liar with no morals lying about a god he has no proof of.

Using science to spread anti-science propoganda.

This is the epitome of creationist troll failure.
Adam

Stoke-on-trent, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10055
Jan 3, 2013
 
RHill wrote:
<quoted text>
No matter what people say, knowledge and faith are mortal enemies and can not really exist in the same Universe together. When you "know" something, faith is unnecessary. You can only have "faith" in something that does not exist, proof or knowledge of that thing is impossible. That's why anti-knowledge or misinformation, such as your Creationism and anti-evolution, anti-science poses are brandished about ... you got nothing else.
+1 nicely said

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 9,521 - 9,540 of11,195
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••