Prove there's a god.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#569396 Dec 4, 2012
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
Durability of an organism is the main attribute that qualifies it as being "fit" to survive.
Nope. It's the ability to produce more viable offspring.
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
The whole point of reproduction is to preserve the genes, as such; but reproduction would not be necessary if the genes were indestructible.
Do you know the difference between a gene and an organism?
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
How is it that evolution selects for the fittest, and gives rise to entities that have needs; when needs are characteristic of weakness and not fitness?
Needs are not weaknesses when the needs can be met. You need oxygen, which is not a weakness if you can stay out of old refrigerators and lake bottoms.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#569397 Dec 4, 2012
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
Predators are in direct conflict with evolution. Predators cannot exist without grazers; so why did evolution facilitate predators, when it is possible that organisms can survive by grazing?
Your understanding of this material is badly deformed, no doubt by your faith science teachers. Predators exist because they can, and they are not in conflict with evolution. The only thing in conflict with evolution is your church.
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
Why does natural selection encourage the birth of organisms that must depend on each other for survival; when it is possible to make organisms that depend only on one abundant food source?
Sorry. Having millions of questions is fine. But you lack the basic education in the field for a reason: you don't care about any of the answers to your questions. They all are declarative statements of your faith disguised as inquiry.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#569398 Dec 4, 2012
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
BTW consensus is not a part of scientific method.
Actually, it is a product of the vetting aspect of the scientific method in the broader sense, which goes beyond observing, hypothesizing, experimenting, collecting data, and induction (generalization).

It's not science just because it's published. It's only accepted into the scientific community after it has been subjected to the larger scientific method: peer review and the test of time.

If the results are reproducible, if they are never contradicted by other findings, if they lead to confirmed predictions, or if they suggests additional avenues of inquiry that are also fruitful, then consensus will be achieved and the information called scientific knowledge.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#569399 Dec 4, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
You can't see the similarity?
They have the same beard, they're both old men, they both keep a naughty and nice list, they both bribe you to be good, you have to write to one and pray to the other, they both descend from and alight to inaccessible realms, and you never see either.
The only difference is that they later tell you that Santa is a myth. You have to figure the god part out on your own.
Religion:

http://theoatmeal.com/comics/religion

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#569400 Dec 4, 2012
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. as the legendary Topix poster, Buck Crick, once said, "50% of homosexuals were born that way. The other 50% not so much." ..
Buck just visited one of the threads.

Single post, about my colorful silk bloomers....

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#569401 Dec 4, 2012
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
Do you know what God has in common with all things that exist? YOU CANNOT PROVE THAT GOD DOES NOT EXIST, JUST THE SAME WAY YOU CANT PROVE THAT THE THINGS THAT EXIST DONT EXIST.
THEREFORE GOD IS WITHIN THE ZONE OF THE EXISTENT, as it relates to proof.
Your argument also applies to elves, pixies, sprites, brownies, fairies, nymphs, satyrs, fawns, changelings, ghosts, goblins, spirits, ghouls, giants, poltergeists, doppelgangers, poltergeists, demons, devils, angels, djinns, succubi, incubi, zombies, mummies, werewolves, banshees, gnomes, trolls, imps, gargoyles, dragons, mermaids, unicorns, sea serpents, furies, harpies, minotaurs, medusae, gremlins, warlocks, and sirens.

They are also in your "Zone of the Existent."
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
You have absolutely no critical thinking skills; so all your education amounts to noting essentially.
Nice thinking yourself there, Aristotle.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#569402 Dec 4, 2012
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>Nobody cares about your carting.
Like a taint carbuncle, you need lancing and draining.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#569403 Dec 4, 2012
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
Emotions dont require sexual expression.
Sometimes it does it on its own.
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
No amount of love and intimacy that you feel for someone of the same sex, justifies you to have sex with that person.
Nobody cares what the scary chicken on a stick taught you about right and wrong. Humanists justify our lives and our habits by other standards: reason and the Golden Rule.
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
Sex has no naturally consistently effective function but reproduction;
Then you're doing it wrong.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#569404 Dec 4, 2012
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
ask the evos, they will tell you. The main role of sex is the propagation of the species.
I'm an evo. The main role of sex in my life is to get my freak on and to see the face of god (BTW, he looks a lot like Willie Nelson).
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
If you love someone you would tend to want to see them reproduce and bring offspring that are like them, so that you can have "more of them" to love.
Really? You seem to see people as reproduction units.
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
In homosexual relationships, there is no chance for reproduction so the genes of the partner are doomed to death and eradication form the life cycle and removed from the circle of life; WHERE IS THE LOVE IN THAT?
Most gay people I know are parents. Most have propagated their genes.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#569405 Dec 4, 2012
OCB wrote:
<quoted text>And a gay person having sex with someone of the opposite sex doesn't call themselves straight!
No shit, they'd call themselves bi.

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

#569406 Dec 4, 2012
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. you do not get to define me or my nephew ..
See what I mean? RR has NO CLUE as to what he is talking about.

That is not because he is straight; I am straight yet very well educated in human sexuality including homosexuality whereas RR is not and I think that is largely due to his incredible homophobia.

He prefers to remain ignorant of what he fears and disdains.

It's easier for him.

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

#569407 Dec 4, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
No shit, they'd call themselves bi.
No- they don't. Only if they actually ARE bi.

But a few isolated instances of a gay person having sex with someone of the opposite sex does not translate into someone being bisexual.

You keep showing your incredible ignorance on this topic- I really do suggest you keep quiet about it as you have already driven home the point of just how ignorant and clueless you are not only about homosexuality, but about sexuality in general.

Hush!

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#569408 Dec 4, 2012
OCB wrote:
a typical nano lie.

You are a nasty curmudgeon blaming the world for your woes.
Here are a couple of good words:

termagant - a quarrelsome, scolding woman; a shrew.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/termagant

cotquean - a coarse or scolding woman.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/cotquean

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

#569409 Dec 4, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
No shit, they'd call themselves bi.
BTW, you really are a naive fool if you think there aren't straight men who have sex with women they don't find attractive, but think will do just fine for sexual release.

And no doubt the same can be said of some straight women.

A physical attraction is NOT needed to want the physical release of sex.

You never heard the following expression:

Put a flag over her face and f*ck for old glory.(or do it for your country)

What do you think that expression means, RR? It means the guy thinks the woman is UGLY but he'll have sex with her anyway because she will satisfy his need as a sexual outlet and for sexual release.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#569410 Dec 4, 2012
OCB wrote:
<quoted text>It IS a lie. It doesn't teach anything any more than a Jesus fish teaches anything.
It simply is a reflection of the views and beliefs of the individual- just like the Jesus fish is.
If you don't think so, then your Jesus fish is doing the same thing: teaching Christian intolerance of other beliefs, particularly atheists.
Put your self-inflicted persecution complex back on the shelf, RR.
It's a mockery of the Jesus fish, that's all.

What's wrong, you can't see it?

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#569411 Dec 4, 2012
OCB wrote:
<quoted text>No- but it IS a work of fiction and at the very least, I don't have to believe it is fact to discuss the characters found within its pages.
The Bible is a work of fiction?

Please admit that's your opinion.

Or continue to look like a fool.

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

#569412 Dec 4, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Here are a couple of good words:
termagant - a quarrelsome, scolding woman; a shrew.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/termagant
cotquean - a coarse or scolding woman.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/cotquean
Love 'em!

But I think nano's issues call for even a stronger description of her totally unpleasant and dysfunctional personality, but those will do in a pinch!

Thanks!

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

#569413 Dec 4, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
The Bible is a work of fiction?
Please admit that's your opinion.
Or continue to look like a fool.
Okay- that's my opinion. No proof that it is anything BUT a work of fiction.

Now- how about YOU admit that it's YOUR opinion that the bible is a work of fact?

Or not....because even if you do, you will still continue to look like the fool you are.

OCB

“What a GLORIOUS day!!!”

Since: Apr 12

Orlando but NYC born & raised

#569414 Dec 4, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a mockery of the Jesus fish, that's all.
What's wrong, you can't see it?
No- it's not. It's a different way of looking at things- that is not a mockery of anything- it's an OPINION- the same as it being an OPINION of those who display a Jesus fish.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#569415 Dec 4, 2012
Evo-Lotion is Rub-ish wrote:
Whatever compromises the survival of the human species is to be eradicated.
Your church preaches apocalypse. It also teaches that scientists, including climatologists, aren't to be trusted or believed.

“We don't have to protect the environment, the Second Coming is at hand”- James Watt, Secretary of the Interior under Reagan

Eradication of your church isn't necessary. We only need to neutralize 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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 11 min IsraelLivesAgain 17,857
God is REAL - Miracles Happen! (Jun '11) 25 min ChromiuMan 5,993
sex cam add me girl safeh977 32 min gtr900 1
hello 34 min gtr900 1
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 36 min Neville Thompson 42,276
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 36 min X Pendable 180,070
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 39 min Phooey 627,792
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 47 min Neville Thompson 278,492
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 1 hr gundee123 14,713
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 1 hr RiccardoFire 615,692
More from around the web