Gitmo Prison Guard Converts From Athe...

Gitmo Prison Guard Converts From Atheism To Islam After Seeing...

There are 1239 comments on the Mediaite.com story from Apr 6, 2013, titled Gitmo Prison Guard Converts From Atheism To Islam After Seeing.... In it, Mediaite.com reports that:

CNN has an amazing story out of Guantanamo Bay about an American atheist prison camp guard that converted to Islam after spending extensive time talking to with some of the English speaking prisoners there.

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

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#732 Jun 17, 2013
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay, tell me what is not created or has no cause or origin.
The universe itself.

Quantum particles. Google "vacuum fluctuation".
Seeker wrote:
Not caused, or cause unknown?
Not caused.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#733 Jun 17, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Yawn you study philosophers and their writings, some of their opinions you'll agree with some are batsht insane.
So you think you are this philosophy genius?
Explain away the problem with evil when it comes to your God.
<quoted text>
Rather arrogant of Seeker, don'cha think?

But arrogance **is** a hallmark of a godbot...

Since: Mar 11

United States

#734 Jun 18, 2013
Exactly philosophy classes you can pass while stoned lol. He probably took one at his local Junior College and now thinks he is all that!

Lol!
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>Rather arrogant of Seeker, don'cha think?

But arrogance **is** a hallmark of a godbot...
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#735 Jun 18, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
The universe itself.
Quantum particles. Google "vacuum fluctuation".
<quoted text>
Not caused.
Nobody says that vacuum energy is not caused. You should read it in more detail.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#736 Jun 18, 2013
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
Nobody says that vacuum energy is not caused. You should read it in more detail.
You should prove your god or f*ck off, as recommended before.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#737 Jun 18, 2013
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
A non created creator. In fact, this can be the only possible definition for God, because if God is created then it can't be God and instead we look towards the creator of God to be the actual God.
<quoted text>
My software analogy makes it "possible" although far from proven.
<quoted text>
Ask a software character to prove that the programmer or creator of the game is real. They can't. The best they could do is to point to the fact that they exist inside the game. That isn't proof, but in the analogy, the software developer DOES exist, but can never be proven with the limited faculties or experience that a software character has.
I will repeat this for you because you are stupid. It does not require a response, just need to read and undetstand it:

Before you even talk about god, you need to prove that

1. The word "god" has a meaningful definition
2. Prove that "god is possible"
3. If god is possible, prove that "god is real"

None of you lying theists can even get past the (1). But here you are, lying your hearts out trying to convert atheists 100X smarter than you, who know more about your cult than you do.

When theists want to be honest instead of liars, atheists are here to listen.

But lying about the definition of atheism, evolution, science, quantum mechanics & the big bang theory will not make all of this damning facts go away.

You choose your beliefs out of stupidity and ignorance. Once you know that they are false you continue to LIE about god.

You take no responsibilty for these lies and play victim, the first chance you get.

While all the while your religion states that "atheists are fools" without ever having met any of them.

You're disgusting dihonest people who make lives miserable for the rest of us rational, normal people who want to get on in life.

Takes responsibility for your stupid beliefs theists.- do it now you cowards. It is the best advice you will ever recieve.

Fight your addiction to faith.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#738 Jun 18, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
I've taken philosophy several times. I made "A"s each and every time.
It is **you** who cannot explain properly.
Sorry about that-- you lose this round.
Well, with all due respect, after observing the way you approach issues such as these, I find that difficult to believe. It's not about what you believe or don't believe, it's about the way you approach the topic itself. I've never seen a good philosophy student who is immediately dismissive of theories as you are. They walk through the logic of the theory and examine it. And I'm not familiar with the expression I MADE "A"s. It's usually I got "A"s or I received "A"s or even I earned "A"s. I made "A"s is a very odd expression for someone who has been to college.

Since: Mar 11

United States

#739 Jun 18, 2013
What do you mean a good philosophy student?

People's personal philosophies are as varied as people themselves. Which you should know had you taken a philosophy class.
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>Well, with all due respect, after observing the way you approach issues such as these, I find that difficult to believe. It's not about what you believe or don't believe, it's about the way you approach the topic itself. I've never seen a good philosophy student who is immediately dismissive of theories as you are. They walk through the logic of the theory and examine it. And I'm not familiar with the expression I MADE "A"s. It's usually I got "A"s or I received "A"s or even I earned "A"s. I made "A"s is a very odd expression for someone who has been to college.
Thinking

Kingston Upon Thames, UK

#740 Jun 18, 2013
Philosophy is great fun but it has limited application in reality.
Givemeliberty wrote:
What do you mean a good philosophy student?
People's personal philosophies are as varied as people themselves. Which you should know had you taken a philosophy class.
<quoted text>
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#741 Jun 18, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Philosophy is great fun but it has limited application in reality.
<quoted text>
Philosophy and science are obviously two different disciplines with two different goals in mind. Philosophy asks questions and attempts to use logic to solve them or at least take logic as far as it can go. Science performs experiments and notes the results. But the surprising thing is that there could be no such thing as science if it wasn't for Philosophy. Science needs logic and math, and both of those things actually originated out of Philosophy. Philosophers created the concept of formal logic and rules for logic and the first Mathematicians were actually Philosophers. Math was created by Philosophical minds and questions.

Obviously Einstein needed to know a lot of math to be able to even ask the right questions. But what made him different than other Physicists was his more because of his Philosophical approach. It wasn't questions of "what is", as science asks, that lead him to his revolutionary discoveries. It was his questions of "what if". And that's what Philosophy is all about.
Thinking

Kingston Upon Thames, UK

#742 Jun 18, 2013
Sadly, philosophy is not solely concerned with logical argument. There's a lot of wishful thinking bollocks in there too.
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
Philosophy and science are obviously two different disciplines with two different goals in mind. Philosophy asks questions and attempts to use logic to solve them or at least take logic as far as it can go. Science performs experiments and notes the results. But the surprising thing is that there could be no such thing as science if it wasn't for Philosophy. Science needs logic and math, and both of those things actually originated out of Philosophy. Philosophers created the concept of formal logic and rules for logic and the first Mathematicians were actually Philosophers. Math was created by Philosophical minds and questions.
Obviously Einstein needed to know a lot of math to be able to even ask the right questions. But what made him different than other Physicists was his more because of his Philosophical approach. It wasn't questions of "what is", as science asks, that lead him to his revolutionary discoveries. It was his questions of "what if". And that's what Philosophy is all about.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#743 Jun 18, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Sadly, philosophy is not solely concerned with logical argument. There's a lot of wishful thinking bollocks in there too.
<quoted text>
Well then those aren't really philosophers that follow the rules of Philosophy properly. None of the Philosophers that I learned about did this. They merely pondered questions of "what if" and then used the rules of logic to take the question as far as it can go.
Thinking

Kingston Upon Thames, UK

#744 Jun 18, 2013
There are plenty of fields of philosophy here that fall outside your requirement to only engage in thought experiments.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy

Finally, when observational evidence contradicts the proposed "what if", philosophers need to dump that "what if" and go try another one.
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
Well then those aren't really philosophers that follow the rules of Philosophy properly. None of the Philosophers that I learned about did this. They merely pondered questions of "what if" and then used the rules of logic to take the question as far as it can go.

Since: Mar 11

United States

#745 Jun 18, 2013
Then you obviously didn't take a reputable class if you even took one at all.
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>Well then those aren't really philosophers that follow the rules of Philosophy properly. None of the Philosophers that I learned about did this. They merely pondered questions of "what if" and then used the rules of logic to take the question as far as it can go.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#746 Jun 18, 2013
Thinking wrote:
There are plenty of fields of philosophy here that fall outside your requirement to only engage in thought experiments.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy
I didn't say they engage in experiments at all, i said science engages in experiments. And here is a quote from what you linked

"Philosophy is distinguished from other ways of addressing such problems by its critical, generally systematic approach and its reliance on rational argument.[3] In more casual speech, by extension, "philosophy" can refer to "the most basic beliefs, concepts, and attitudes of an individual or group".

In more "casual" speech, which means it isn't really Philosophy.
Thinking wrote:
Finally, when observational evidence contradicts the proposed "what if", philosophers need to dump that "what if" and go try another one.
<quoted text>
And they do, or they ask further questions about what the observations really mean. Science has nothing to do with what the observations mean, that goes into Philosophical thought. Science merely conducts experiments and records the results. Science actually can't even decide which experiments to even conduct without some sort of Philosophical thought or thinking. I think most of the best Physicists are well versed in Philosophy as well and have a good grasp of it. Heisenberg himself wrote a book titled Physics and Philosophy.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#747 Jun 18, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Then you obviously didn't take a reputable class if you even took one at all.
<quoted text>
Well then I guess that Rutgers University is not a reputable University.
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#748 Jun 18, 2013
"Thinking", are you sure you have studied Philosophy?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gottfried_Wilhel...

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#749 Jun 18, 2013
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
Well then I guess that Rutgers University is not a reputable University.
Oh, you went to Rudgers, so any and all b*llocks lies coming from you should suddenly be truth, right?
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#750 Jun 18, 2013
Seeker wrote:
<quoted text>
Well then I guess that Rutgers University is not a reputable University.
Well, since this got marked as spam, nuts and disagree, maybe I should quote some "facts".

Recent University rankings

Nationally

ARWU 40
Forbes 198
U.S. News & World Report 68
Washington Monthly 85

Globally

ARWU 61
QS 260
Times 99
Seeker

Lowell, MA

#751 Jun 18, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, you went to Rudgers, so any and all b*llocks lies coming from you should suddenly be truth, right?
Why don't you simply read what Philosophers actually are? Here is an example of a famous and notable one. It really seems like most of you guys have no idea of what Philosophy even is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gottfried_Wilhel...

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) 2 min IB DaMann 74,806
News Nonsense of a high order: The confused world of... 1 hr Nemesis 4,051
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... 2 hr Nemesis 119
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 4 hr John 32,063
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 22 hr Subduction Zone 6,084
News The war on Christmas (Dec '10) Wed John 4,951
News Why do public atheists have to behave like such... Jun 21 Eagle 12 - 4
More from around the web