Aliens and evolution

Aliens and evolution

There are 6309 comments on the Washington Times story from Jun 19, 2012, titled Aliens and evolution. In it, Washington Times reports that:

DENTON, Texas, June 19, 2012 - Aliens are ingrained in our cultural psyche. They abound in books, movies, radio, and a thousand theories about the extra-terrestrial, little green men, UFO sightings, abductions, Area 51, and Roswell.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Washington Times.

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#3829 Oct 17, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
The weakest dictionary you can find still includes
"believed to be" .
Once again "I believe" I can bowl a 600 game because I get doubles
I believe I can fly , I believe I'm a billionaire ,I bleep!
Belief does make anything come true.
No apology.
ugg. Firefox crashed after a long post, so gonna sum it up.

You need to ask an adult to help you understand the difference between objective and subjective criteria. This has been a problem for you for months.

You keep trying to disprove that subjective claims can be made on the basis of belief by citing examples of objective claims which can not.

That's retarded.

If Brad Pitt is BELIEVED to be cool, then he is cool.
It doesn't matter that you can't fly.

"Cool" is SUBJECTIVE and the ONLY criteria for it is the BELIEF of the people who SUBJECTIVELY apply the term to Brad Pitt.

Without any sort of cultural reference, if I presented you with the body of a deceased Brad Pitt, you couldn't determine one way or another if he was "cool". It's SUBJECTIVE.

Religion is SUBJECTIVE. One person believes that wine is a sacrament. Another believes that all alcohol is forbidden.

OBJECTIVELY it's a bottle of wine.
SUBJECTIVELY (depending on cultural reference) it's sacramental wine or forbidden drink.

OBJECTIVELY Pharaohs were Egyptians.
SUBJECTIVELY they were gods.

ALL gods. Every single one of them are SUBJECTIVELY gods.

If I present you with a picture of Zeus with NO CULTURAL reference, you could not determine whether or not he was a god.

However, present the SAME picture of Zeus to an ancient Greek and they will absolutely be able to tell you that "yes, this is a god".

So, you can keep bringing up bowling and flying and chairs, but NONE OF IT is subjective and therefore NONE of it is a rational critique of my argument.

Egyptians BELIEVED that Pharaohs were gods. Therefore, SUBJECTIVELY, Pharaohs were gods.

AND, since ALL GODS are ONLY SUBJECTIVE, then Pharaohs are AS MUCH gods as ANY OTHER GOD from ANY OTHER RELIGION.

But, since PHARAOHS were ACTUALLY OBJECTIVELY PHYSICALLY REAL, they are different than Thor or Vishnu or most other gods in that they were also REAL.

Therefore, Pharaohs were "gods that really existed" as opposed to Vishnu who is a "god which theoretically existed" or a "god which mythologically existed".

I don't actually know the history of Vishnu, I just wanted to pick a non-Judeo/Christian/Islamist deity.

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#3830 Oct 17, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> I see the Urban dictionary defines you too.
4. Pharaoh
Verb: Pulling one's brain out, through the nostril, with a curved dick.
Nuggin was pharaohed and died. lol
I know that English is new to you but you'll soon find that there are a great number of words in the English language which have multiple and varied definitions which sometimes seem at odds with one another or even completely unrelated.

Perhaps you should worry about finishing your educated before delving into the most complicated "high school level" English which is apparently such a problem for you.

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#3831 Oct 17, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
ugg. Firefox crashed after a long post, so gonna sum it up.
You need to ask an adult to help you understand the difference between objective and subjective criteria. This has been a problem for you for months.
You keep trying to disprove that subjective claims can be made on the basis of belief by citing examples of objective claims which can not.
That's retarded.
If Brad Pitt is BELIEVED to be cool, then he is cool.
It doesn't matter that you can't fly.
"Cool" is SUBJECTIVE and the ONLY criteria for it is the BELIEF of the people who SUBJECTIVELY apply the term to Brad Pitt.
Without any sort of cultural reference, if I presented you with the body of a deceased Brad Pitt, you couldn't determine one way or another if he was "cool". It's SUBJECTIVE.
Religion is SUBJECTIVE. One person believes that wine is a sacrament. Another believes that all alcohol is forbidden.
OBJECTIVELY it's a bottle of wine.
SUBJECTIVELY (depending on cultural reference) it's sacramental wine or forbidden drink.
OBJECTIVELY Pharaohs were Egyptians.
SUBJECTIVELY they were gods.
ALL gods. Every single one of them are SUBJECTIVELY gods.
If I present you with a picture of Zeus with NO CULTURAL reference, you could not determine whether or not he was a god.
However, present the SAME picture of Zeus to an ancient Greek and they will absolutely be able to tell you that "yes, this is a god".
So, you can keep bringing up bowling and flying and chairs, but NONE OF IT is subjective and therefore NONE of it is a rational critique of my argument.
Egyptians BELIEVED that Pharaohs were gods. Therefore, SUBJECTIVELY, Pharaohs were gods.
AND, since ALL GODS are ONLY SUBJECTIVE, then Pharaohs are AS MUCH gods as ANY OTHER GOD from ANY OTHER RELIGION.
But, since PHARAOHS were ACTUALLY OBJECTIVELY PHYSICALLY REAL, they are different than Thor or Vishnu or most other gods in that they were also REAL.
Therefore, Pharaohs were "gods that really existed" as opposed to Vishnu who is a "god which theoretically existed" or a "god which mythologically existed".
I don't actually know the history of Vishnu, I just wanted to pick a non-Judeo/Christian/Islamist deity.
I'll make it brief, you're a idiot.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#3832 Oct 17, 2012
Double Fine wrote:
<quoted text>
And I'm COMMENTING
<quoted text>
Okay will do next time.
<quoted text>
Okay.
But we are clear.
Pharoah is god. Or Jesus is god. Or Hapi is god. Ra is also god.
I worship ALL OF THEM. All 40,000 of them.
Just...Don't bring it up again (shudder)
It's Skippy's fault.(shrug)

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#3833 Oct 17, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text> I'll make it brief, you're a idiot.
And around and around it goes.

I present a well thought out argument citing examples and explaining it to you in a language that even someone with your chromosome deficiency can understand.

You respond with an insult, then wait a month and come back making the EXACT same bogus claim again as if it hadn't already been refuted point by point a dozen times before.

And you wonder why I think you're a Creationist.

Care to point out exactly WHAT you disagree with? I'll give you some options.

You could disagree that "cool" is subjective.
You could disagree that the people of Egypt actually existed.
You could disagree that the Pharaohs were worshiped.

or you could fall back to the position "My god is the only real god" you were spouting earlier in the thread.

But, just so you know, none of those are going to win you this argument.

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#3834 Oct 17, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
And around and around it goes.
I present a well thought out argument citing examples and explaining it to you in a language that even someone with your chromosome deficiency can understand.
You respond with an insult, then wait a month and come back making the EXACT same bogus claim again as if it hadn't already been refuted point by point a dozen times before.
And you wonder why I think you're a Creationist.
Care to point out exactly WHAT you disagree with? I'll give you some options.
You could disagree that "cool" is subjective.
You could disagree that the people of Egypt actually existed.
You could disagree that the Pharaohs were worshiped.
or you could fall back to the position "My god is the only real god" you were spouting earlier in the thread.
But, just so you know, none of those are going to win you this argument.

Your argument is the same as saying that if Hugo Chavez declares himself god and the people of Venezuela believe him , then he is god. BS , all it means is he is nuts and Venezuelans are stupid.

The problem is you are telling people who do not belong to
the "pharaoh is god" cult. Sure if you are in the cult you may believe the cult. But you are asking me to believe something I know is lie, in fact belief does not qualify your assertion.
It does say

It didn't qualify the Ptolemaic Dynasty to the Romans , and it doesn't qualify Ramses as god to America. Subjectively objectively abstractly , eyes closed , standing on my head , sitting in a tree tripping on mushrooms ,or any other state of mind you may have what have you. It does mean Pharaoh is nuts and Egyptians were stupid.

Want to guess what that makes you?


Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#3835 Oct 17, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
Your argument is the same as saying that if Hugo Chavez declares himself god and the people of Venezuela believe him , then he is god. BS , all it means is he is nuts and Venezuelans are stupid.
How is you saying "Those Venezuelans are nuts and their god isn't real" any different than saying "Those Hindus/Christians/Sieks/Krishn as are nuts and their god/gods aren't real"?

You aren't the arbiter of which religions get to be considered valid or invalid.

You don't get to say "My precious Christianity is special and is the only REAL religion with the only REAL god and all other religions don't count."

The Egyptians had a religion, they believed what they believed. There were functioning parts of that religion. One of those parts were the Pharaohs who were deities.

Your opinion of that is irrelevant to the historical facts and the sociological implications of that religion.

It doesn't matter how hard you slap your Bible, you aren't going to negate their existence.
The problem is you are telling people who do not belong to
the "pharaoh is god" cult. Sure if you are in the cult you may believe the cult. But you are asking me to believe something I know is lie, in fact belief does not qualify your assertion.
No. I'm not asking you to believe anything. YOUR believe is irrelevant.

I don't PERSONALLY believe that Zeus sits on Mt. Olympus and turns into a swan etc. However, I acknowledge that the ancient Greeks DID believe that.

Therefore, when putting together a comprehensive list of "gods of the Mediterranean" I would include Zeus on that list.

My BELIEF - not relevant
YOUR BELIEF - not relevant
Their BELIEVE - relevant

THEY believed he was a god, therefore he gets god status.
YOU believe that Jesus is a god, therefore Jesus gets equal status.
It didn't qualify the Ptolemaic Dynasty to the Romans, and it doesn't qualify Ramses as god to America.
Also doesn't matter. Whether or not person A believes in the religion of person B does not negate the fact that person B believes in their religion.

Your claim that Jesus is the one and only true god does not negate the existence of Hinduism no matter how hard you want it to.
Want to guess what that makes you?
Far more worldly and sophisticated than yourself.

Look, I get it. You're part way through the 10th grade. You've read half a book and you think you know something.

The fact of the matter is, when you grow up, IF you get an education and IF you move out of whatever fundamentalist compound you are writing from, there is a pretty good chance that you'll experience SOMETHING other than what your mother force fed you.

At THAT point you'll discover that, Wow! There REALLY are people who are Hindus!

Other religions exist. Get over it.

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#3836 Oct 17, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
How is you saying "Those Venezuelans are nuts and their god isn't real" any different than saying "Those Hindus/Christians/Sieks/Krishn as are nuts and their god/gods aren't real"?
You aren't the arbiter of which religions get to be considered valid or invalid.
You don't get to say "My precious Christianity is special and is the only REAL religion with the only REAL god and all other religions don't count."
The Egyptians had a religion, they believed what they believed. There were functioning parts of that religion. One of those parts were the Pharaohs who were deities.
Your opinion of that is irrelevant to the historical facts and the sociological implications of that religion.
It doesn't matter how hard you slap your Bible, you aren't going to negate their existence.
<quoted text>
No. I'm not asking you to believe anything. YOUR believe is irrelevant.
I don't PERSONALLY believe that Zeus sits on Mt. Olympus and turns into a swan etc. However, I acknowledge that the ancient Greeks DID believe that.
Therefore, when putting together a comprehensive list of "gods of the Mediterranean" I would include Zeus on that list.
My BELIEF - not relevant
YOUR BELIEF - not relevant
Their BELIEVE - relevant
THEY believed he was a god, therefore he gets god status.
YOU believe that Jesus is a god, therefore Jesus gets equal status.
<quoted text>
Also doesn't matter. Whether or not person A believes in the religion of person B does not negate the fact that person B believes in their religion.
Your claim that Jesus is the one and only true god does not negate the existence of Hinduism no matter how hard you want it to.
<quoted text>
Far more worldly and sophisticated than yourself.
Look, I get it. You're part way through the 10th grade. You've read half a book and you think you know something.
The fact of the matter is, when you grow up, IF you get an education and IF you move out of whatever fundamentalist compound you are writing from, there is a pretty good chance that you'll experience SOMETHING other than what your mother force fed you.
At THAT point you'll discover that, Wow! There REALLY are people who are Hindus!
Other religions exist. Get over it.
This is correct.

Those Hindus/Christians/Sieks/Krishn /EGYPTIANS/Muslims/Jews as are nuts and their god/gods aren't real"

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#3837 Oct 17, 2012
The rest is hogwash .

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#3838 Oct 17, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
And around and around it goes.
I present a well thought out argument citing examples and explaining it to you in a language that even someone with your chromosome deficiency can understand.
You respond with an insult, then wait a month and come back making the EXACT same bogus claim again as if it hadn't already been refuted point by point a dozen times before.
And you wonder why I think you're a Creationist.
Care to point out exactly WHAT you disagree with? I'll give you some options.
You could disagree that "cool" is subjective.
You could disagree that the people of Egypt actually existed.
You could disagree that the Pharaohs were worshiped.
or you could fall back to the position "My god is the only real god" you were spouting earlier in the thread.
But, just so you know, none of those are going to win you this argument.
I speak for everyone that cares about the importance of rationality and sanity when I say shut the f*ck up you stupid piece of drivelling sh*t. I don't know why you sh*t words, I really don't but you need a doctor asap.

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#3839 Oct 17, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
This is correct.
Those Hindus/Christians/Sieks/Krishn /EGYPTIANS/Muslims/Jews as are nuts and their god/gods aren't real"
These religions had gods.

You can't deny that they had gods.

So, either you are saying that the gods which are at the center of these religions are not "real" meaning they didn't actually exist physically -or- you are claiming that whether or not they actually existed they don't meet some standard YOU have picked for determining whether or not something "counts" as a god.

Well, since Pharaohs ACTUALLY did exist, the first version of your argument is negated.

So, that leaves you in the position of giving us an example of a "real god" against which you are checking these "false gods".

Got that? Got a "real god"?

Or, are you willing to say that ALL of these gods fit the exact same criteria as ALL THE OTHER gods from EVERY other religion and that you can't come up with ANY examples which are better than any of the gods in any of these religions?

Basically, your entire argument comes down to:

"I don't like these other religions therefore they don't exist."

That's childish.

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#3840 Oct 17, 2012
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
I speak for everyone that cares about the importance of rationality and sanity when I say shut the f*ck up you stupid piece of drivelling sh*t. I don't know why you sh*t words, I really don't but you need a doctor asap.
First of all, Skippy, you don't speak for everyone. You barely speak for yourself. Evidenced in the fact that you continue to deny statements which are CLEARLY present in this thread. Statements you made denying the moon landing for example.

Check page 4 if you've forgotten.

Second, YOU brought this up. This was a dead thread. YOU went back and pulled it up to try and rehash this argument only to discover that you STILL can't win it.

Third, your response is so typically childish that it's evident to ANYONE who's reading this that you've lost your cool. You don't have the maturity or intellectual honesty to just admit you were wrong, so you lob insults and pretend that counts.

Once again, WHERE is the evidence backing ANY of your claims? Hundreds of pages of posts and you've NEVER present a single shred of evidence backing ANYTHING you've said.

No evidence that the moon landing was fake.
No evidence that lizards are imaginary creatures.
No evidence that Egypt wasn't/isn't a real place.
No evidence that you are in possession of ALL the information in the Universe.

Hell, you can't even give YOUR definition of "burden of proof".

Face it, you should have left this one alone because you lost this COMPLETELY.

“Wrath”

Since: Dec 10

Is revenant

#3841 Oct 17, 2012
Nuggin wrote:
<quoted text>
These religions had gods.
You can't deny that they had gods.
So, either you are saying that the gods which are at the center of these religions are not "real" meaning they didn't actually exist physically -or- you are claiming that whether or not they actually existed they don't meet some standard YOU have picked for determining whether or not something "counts" as a god.
Well, since Pharaohs ACTUALLY did exist, the first version of your argument is negated.
So, that leaves you in the position of giving us an example of a "real god" against which you are checking these "false gods".
Got that? Got a "real god"?
Or, are you willing to say that ALL of these gods fit the exact same criteria as ALL THE OTHER gods from EVERY other religion and that you can't come up with ANY examples which are better than any of the gods in any of these religions?
Basically, your entire argument comes down to:
"I don't like these other religions therefore they don't exist."
That's childish.

First of all the Pharaohs are extinct.
Yes there are two kinds of gods .
1. Those that are deposed.
2. Those that have not been deposed.

Pharaohs have been absolutely deposed. As well as exposed as fakes.

Of gods accepted in today's world I personally do no accept any of them. But as you say belief by people keeps them alive.
That doesn't make them real either , it does make them active.

The fact that Pharaohs were human and had specific claims that made them demigods , made it easier to expose the fallacy they built upon. Alexander the great was not a god but fallaciously became one right before he died. This a is a position they put themselves , but not one of reality. It is one of deception.

All gods are mythological even the ones accepted today are fallacious and do not exist. It is just that humans have invented supernatural ones that cannot be exposed , so their belief persists. I agree with you that Pharaohs "played" the part of gods incarnate , but this was a deception. So despite anyone's belief in them they relied on this deception to qualify them.
They were tyrants , fakes , and false gods.

The fact is there is no god that can be produced to qualify as such, and as I told you before it is not some standard "I" have picked to disqualify them. It is specifically the claims "they" used to qualify themselves.

1. The Pharaohs claimed to have been the offspring of gods such as RA.

***This is a false claim.

2. The Pharaohs claimed to have magical powers to make the sun rise , and ability to control the Nile among other things.

***This also is a false claim.

So you see it isn't some standard I have picked for determining whether or not something "counts" as a god.
It is the falsification using the very things they used to claim they were that defeats them.

The same holds true for all gods Nuggin, they all can be falsified by the very claims that make them them such.



“First it steals your mind..”

Since: Jun 11

..and then it steals your soul

#3842 Oct 18, 2012
Sigh.

“There is no such thing”

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#3843 Oct 18, 2012
Are people really that dense that they can not seee what is being said? [email protected]?!
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#3845 Oct 18, 2012
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
I speak for everyone that cares about the importance of rationality and sanity when I say shut the f*ck up you stupid piece of drivelling sh*t. I don't know why you sh*t words, I really don't but you need a doctor asap.
You're foaming at the mouth, Skip. You're like an aggressive version of that dog from Turner and Hooch.

Except the dog was smarter than you.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#3846 Oct 18, 2012
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
You're foaming at the mouth, Skip. You're like an aggressive version of that dog from Turner and Hooch.
Except the dog was smarter than you.
Yeah that must be it, coward troll with not a shred of evidence to support your claim that "god is possible".

I don't know what's more stupid about you, that fact that you don't know what the burden of proof is, after people have explained it to you from every angle, or that you are actually brain damaged and couldn't reason your way out of a paper bag.

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#3847 Oct 18, 2012
Aura Mytha wrote:
<quoted text>
First of all the Pharaohs are extinct.
Yes there are two kinds of gods .
1. Those that are deposed.
2. Those that have not been deposed.
If you want to set that as a criteria, then you should be able to present numerous examples where the Greek pantheon is referred to as "no longer gods".

Hades is "no longer the god of the Underworld" etc.

Got ANY examples of that?

Or, as you know is the case, are these individuals still referred to by their titles?
Of gods accepted in today's world I personally do no accept any of them.
Whether or not you accept them is irrelevant to whether or not they are gods.
That doesn't make them real either , it does make them active.
The fact that Pharaohs were human and had specific claims that made them demigods , made it easier to expose the fallacy they built upon.
Your OWN criteria above claims that ALL gods are fake.'
Your claim here is that Pharaohs were fake.
Your conclusion is that Pharaohs are not gods.

If A (god) then B (fake).
Pharaohs were B, therefore not A.

While we can't logically conclude B therefore A without more input, it's utterly illogical to conclude the opposite.
Alexander the great was not a god but fallaciously became one right before he died. This a is a position they put themselves , but not one of reality. It is one of deception.
This is another one of your "real gods" vs "fake gods" comments.

Above you claim there are NO real gods.
Here you claim that these people are "fake gods".

If ALL gods are "fake gods", then these people being "fake gods" MAKES them just like EVERY OTHER GOD.
All gods are mythological even the ones accepted today are fallacious and do not exist.
This is where you are failing.

Zeus is a god. Zeus does not exist materialistically. We agree.
Guru Kevin from the I-Just-Made-This-Up cult is a god. He has ALL the real powers possessed by Zeus. He DOES exist materialistically.

Now, Guru Kevin can not demonstrate any powers that you don't also have, but then again neither can Zeus.

The possession of powers therefore is not a factor.
What is a factor is whether or not the FOLLOWERS believe he has powers.
They were tyrants , fakes , and false gods.
So they were false gods when compared to which real gods?
The fact is there is no god that can be produced to qualify as such
That statement is nonsense.

You can not set a criteria for a group which already exists such that it precludes all members of that group.

There exists a commonly accepted group of names which point to various gods from various religions around the world.

YOUR claim now is that you want to redefine the word "god" such that there are no examples of it.

How is that argument any better than claiming "There are no trees" or "there are no chairs" where you simple redefine those words as well.
1. The Pharaohs claimed to have been the offspring of gods such as RA.
***This is a false claim.
2. The Pharaohs claimed to have magical powers to make the sun rise , and ability to control the Nile among other things.
***This also is a false claim.
Doesn't matter.

The Bible claims that Jesus walked on water. That's a false claim. That doesn't change the fact that Jesus is regarded by a billion + people to be a "god" and that you would find his name on any comprehensive list of gods.
The same holds true for all gods Nuggin, they all can be falsified by the very claims that make them them such.
Ditto, all trees, chairs, internet connections,... Right?

Pretty much ANY noun you want to be contrarian about you can just claim "there are no real X" and then proceed to declare that any X you don't like doesn't count.

That's hardly a valid form of argument.

You have CONTINUOUSLY used the word "god" in your post while simultaneously claiming that the word is nonsense and describes a null set. Fail

Since: Sep 07

Los Angeles, CA

#3848 Oct 18, 2012
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah that must be it, coward troll with not a shred of evidence to support your claim that "god is possible".
For those who have just joined the thread, please remind us what evidence you have presented to back up your claim that these things are impossible.

...

Waiting...

Go ahead and go back over the thread. See if you can find a post where you've presented some evidence...

Take your time...

...
...
...
Still nothing? That's weird.

Seems like you made the first claim and then failed to present evidence to support it
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#3849 Oct 18, 2012
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah that must be it, coward troll with not a shred of evidence to support your claim that "god is possible". I don't know what's more stupid about you, that fact that you don't know what the burden of proof is, after people have explained it to you from every angle, or that you are actually brain damaged and couldn't reason your way out of a paper bag.
Actually they haven't. You certainly haven't and it was you and I who started this whole thing on another thread 8 or more months ago. Come on Skip. You know the arguments, you know you haven't even tried addressing them even once. So skip on the insults for once and try a coherent rebuttal for once.

Or at least apologize for lying.

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 "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 28 min Aura Mytha 43,237
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 51 min It aint necessari... 18,571
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 4 hr AmericanPagan 21,175
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 9 hr Eagle 12 10,051
For Atheists: Why do You Call Theories "Scient... 9 hr Eagle 12 753
A Universe from Nothing? 10 hr Into The Night 538
Evidence for God! (Oct '14) 10 hr Patrick 465
More from around the web