Atheists on the march in America

[John]

My goodness you are self loathing loons. Postscript keeps beating you back and exposing your illogical nothing. You still have no evidence. You still have no accountable position. You still are bigots afraid to debate the evidence of the prime mover you mock vs something of your own.

Today is a day to give thanks though. Each of you Obama voters should visit a shelter or food bank, they are swamped. Families have no shelter and children no food. The food stamp president and your mind numbingly ignorant votes did that. Shame!

Stump an antitheist! Ask them what they believe.

[Thinking]

Cockpuppet.

John wrote:

My goodness you are self loathing loons. Postscript keeps beating you back and exposing your illogical nothing. You still have no evidence. You still have no accountable position. You still are bigots afraid to debate the evidence of the prime mover you mock vs something of your own.
Today is a day to give thanks though. Each of you Obama voters should visit a shelter or food bank, they are swamped. Families have no shelter and children no food. The food stamp president and your mind numbingly ignorant votes did that. Shame!
Stump an antitheist! Ask them what they believe.

[KittenKoder]

postscript wrote:

<quoted text>
The fact that I don't look like my parents is not a genetic abnormality.(laugh) You crack me up!
<quoted text>
Is that what happened to you? Or were you behind the door when God passed out brains?

I did not say abnormality, and technically nothing is really an abnormality, it is just less beneficial in some ways or more beneficial. Life forms do not have "normals," only machines and 3D meshes.

[KittenKoder]

Rose_NoHo wrote:

<quoted text>
"Survival of the fittest" is a tautology, since there is no way to determine what is "fittest" apart from survival.

That is exceptionally excellent point.

[John]

KittenKoder wrote:

<quoted text>
That is exceptionally excellent point.

Thank you. Atheists don't have a point.

[nanoanomaly]

KittenKoder wrote:

<quoted text>
Caring for the weaker of your species does make your species more fit. The only way a species genetics could be strong is with diversity, destroying those who are unique, in any way, weakens the species as a whole, and thus would lead to extinction. It is one reason reptiles are less fit, they did not develop the nurturing instincts until later, so their genetic diversity is lower than that of most mammals. Then there is the lack of comprehending what fit is. Intelligence has a huge impact on how fit an organism is, in spite of all his weaknesses, Hawking, for example, is exceptionally fit for survival, so long as the species is willing to accept the intelligent information given by these organisms, we can become even more fit.
This is the evolutionary advantage humans have had, our capability to defend and even remove ourselves from natural selection itself, it's part of that being able to change ourselves trait that makes us stand out from the other animals. It is not our similarities that give us strength, or make us fit, it is our differences.

No, it doesn't.

[nanoanomaly]

Givemeliberty wrote:

I went to school with a guy who was blind and in a wheelchair and wore hearing aids and still could just barely hear. Still he was very intelligent and made fascinating clay sculptures that the school still has on display to this day.
Now in Lil IQ's world that young man due to his disabilities should be left somewhere to die. But what should one expect from that troll?
<quoted text>

That's not what he's saying you freak.

[nanoanomaly]

Rose_NoHo wrote:

<quoted text>
"Survival of the fittest" is a tautology, since there is no way to determine what is "fittest" apart from survival.

As usual, you make no sense at all.

[nanoanomaly]

Lil Ticked wrote:

<quoted text>Look here little missy . I am about as religious as you are retarded.

Ahem...you may have to reword this one....

[nanoanomaly]

Lil Ticked wrote:

<quoted text>I am just wondering if you can have a conversation with out being a douche bag.. anyway...

That is impossible.

[nanoanomaly]

Lil Ticked wrote:

What happens beyond the event horizon of a black hole?

A buttload of recycling, i.e., information shredding. The universe must be afraid of having its identity stolen.

[KittenKoder]

nanoanomaly wrote:

<quoted text>No, it doesn't.

Aw, you lack the education and study to actually counter what I posted. Sucks to be you.

[KittenKoder]

nanoanomaly wrote:

<quoted text>A buttload of recycling, i.e., information shredding. The universe must be afraid of having its identity stolen.

No, it doesn't.

[KittenKoder]

nanoanomaly wrote:

<quoted text>That is impossible.

No it isn't.

[KittenKoder]

nanoanomaly wrote:

<quoted text>Ahem...you may have to reword this one....

No they don't.

[postscript]

KittenKoder wrote:

<quoted text>
I did not say abnormality, and technically nothing is really an abnormality, it is just less beneficial in some ways or more beneficial. Life forms do not have "normals," only machines and 3D meshes.

I said it - "If that were true, genetic abnormalities would not be passed from one generation to the next."

Even an elementary school kid knows a genetic disorder, which is always inherited, is caused by ABNORMALITIES in genes or chromosomes.

[KittenKoder]

postscript wrote:

<quoted text>
I said it - "If that were true, genetic abnormalities would not be passed from one generation to the next."
Even an elementary school kid knows a genetic disorder, which is always inherited, is caused by ABNORMALITIES in genes or chromosomes.

We call them abnormalities in the lay world, that does not mean the term is accurately applied. It's only been about 100 years since we figured out that there is no normal in any living thing, there is beneficial or detrimental, that's all. AIDS resistance is one such "abnormality," but would you call it "abnormal?" Hair color is an "abnormality" by your definition, but do you call it "abnormal?"

[postscript]

KittenKoder wrote:

<quoted text>
We call them abnormalities in the lay world, that does not mean the term is accurately applied. It's only been about 100 years since we figured out that there is no normal in any living thing, there is beneficial or detrimental, that's all. AIDS resistance is one such "abnormality," but would you call it "abnormal?" Hair color is an "abnormality" by your definition, but do you call it "abnormal?"

I've heard more coherent statements from a schizophrenic with Tourette's syndrome.

[Thinking]

Bollocks.

postscript wrote:

<quoted text>
I said it - "If that were true, genetic abnormalities would not be passed from one generation to the next."
Even an elementary school kid knows a genetic disorder, which is always inherited, is caused by ABNORMALITIES in genes or chromosomes.

[KittenKoder]

postscript wrote:

<quoted text>
I've heard more coherent statements from a schizophrenic with Tourette's syndrome.

In other words, it was so far over your head because you lack any study or education in even simple scientific understanding.