Prove there's a god.

“I speak my mind”

Since: Sep 10

It hurts to bite my tongue

#640831 Jul 14, 2013
Huh wrote:
<quoted text>You are really Riverdancing now. Describe the exact nature of your personal god and I can disprove it. You are either unable or unwilling. All that can be concluded so far is that there is no distinction between the invisible and the non-existent.
Riverdancing!!!..sweet!

I did...a few pages back...go back and read it.
Huh

Dallas, TX

#640832 Jul 14, 2013
Truth signed in wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not in over my head...I'm just not gonna get in a battle of wits with someone who can't argue with me, based on what I say, but rather insists on applying the characteristics of ALL Christians on me and expecting me to be responsible. If Karl...Huh..or whoever this poster is has a problem with a specific claim I have made...then...we'll discuss it.
You haven't said anything. You are clearly unarmed. You just keep Riverdancing. It suits you.

“I speak my mind”

Since: Sep 10

It hurts to bite my tongue

#640833 Jul 14, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>In all fairness, you don't expect a four-legged beast to try and mount you just because you leaned over to relieve yourself in the woods. Most people don't realize that livestock can be unpredictable. I've seen bulls and stallions do some crazy stuff when they can't get to a female after smelling the heat on the air. Picture Pepe le Pew on ecstasy laced crack.
LOL...well that's true...I'm still concerned about why this guy felt the need to drop his drawers in a donkey field. Strange....

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#640834 Jul 14, 2013
oneear69 wrote:
<quoted text>Still waiting for any kind of Proof that a god exists, or even that a guy named JC,ever existed.
I've found my proof, why are you still waiting?

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#640835 Jul 14, 2013
Godfather wrote:
I get out from my mom ass, that's prove a god excist
You really shouldn't be in your mom's ass.

Sister, maybe.

lol
Huh

Dallas, TX

#640836 Jul 14, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>The fight-or-flight response doe not prove there is no free will.
Why pick just one of the millions of autonomic responses? Oh, and it does. You must have something better than a Pee Wee Herman retort, no?
Huh

Dallas, TX

#640837 Jul 14, 2013
True Truth wrote:
<quoted text>
True Truth is a name expressing my desire to strive for objectivity, or at the very least, mutual subjectivity.
Are my words more true than TSI? That is for you to find out ;)
..........
(In my opinion, I would say "Hell Yeah!". But sshhhh, don't tell the lady)
:)
Of course you do and all it does is illustrate ego is your motivation to theism. So sad.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#640838 Jul 14, 2013
Aura Mytha wrote:

You are reading from a 2000 year old book of tribal nonsense , and you are telling me to not be ignorant?
Yes. It is that old book you're ignorant of.

You DO understand what ignorant means, yes?
Huh

Dallas, TX

#640839 Jul 14, 2013
RiccardoFire wrote:
<quoted text>Chemical reactions in a puddle of crud does not form intelligent life.
If you are describing your parent's sex life, you might be right.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#640840 Jul 14, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>Ahem! Well...ahem....
...
uh, I'm overcome with the imagery...sink or swim...swallow or suffocate. With my luck it would likely end in swallowcate.
You'd swallowcate with me...

;)

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#640841 Jul 14, 2013
Mythic Idiot wrote:

Does anyone need any additional proof that this death-denying cowardly Christian redneck godbot is mentally retarded and should simply be ignored?
Um.... You posted to me. That means you aren't ignoring me.

Dumb atheist.
Huh

Dallas, TX

#640842 Jul 14, 2013
Truth signed in wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm talking about the post where I told Karl...I should be come Karlette...There was no theist position in that post. I have no idea what you're referring to.
Go look back. The post to which your reply was attached had nothing to do with your reply. It was a video of the lying tactics of theists and professional apologists. You failed to address that. What is your obsession with Karl? You are very strange.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#640843 Jul 14, 2013
Mythic Idiot wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's some friendly words of advice. Use google and do your own objective research instead of continuing to humiliate yourself on an international forum, kid.
http://www.theaunicornist.com/2011/07/what-sh...
Any reasonable person must concede that if the universe is designed for life – particularly for intelligent life like us – then it's an astonishingly poor design. It's not only inefficient, it's counterproductive – since life, when it finally does emerge, must struggle to survive. If the universe were designed for us, then a Genesis-type cosmology is what we should expect: humans are created at the inception of all things, and the universe need not be any bigger or older than is required to support our existence. It certainly need not be inhospitable. Why would an all-knowing, omnipotent Creator design a universe that wastes so much space and time – and then, when life finally emerges in a microscopic corner of a galaxy filled with hundreds of billions of stars, make mere survival such a struggle? The believer has no answer. The reality is that the universe we observe is far more consistent with the idea that life is a "happy accident" – a rare byproduct of the laws of the universe rather than the purpose of them.
*plays the world's smallest violin for the your speculation*
Huh

Dallas, TX

#640844 Jul 14, 2013
Truth signed in wrote:
<quoted text>
Riverdancing!!!..sweet!
I did...a few pages back...go back and read it.
No, you did not. Mentioning the trinity and calling it a creator is not describing its nature. Sheez.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#640845 Jul 14, 2013
Huh wrote:
<quoted text>No, this is a bald-faced lie, or, as I like to call it, theism.
Or as the rest of the English speaking world calls it, a "bold-faced" lie.

Dumb atheist.

Catcher1

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#640846 Jul 14, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
I've found my proof, why are you still waiting?
Some of us require evidence in order to form a belief.

We are intellectually honest, unlike you.

RiversideRedneck

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#640847 Jul 14, 2013
Huh wrote:
<quoted text>When you resort to rhetorical hair splitting, you've lost.
It's not hairsplitting, it's the fact of what's written in the Bible.

Both in Genesis and Revelation, it is called a serpent, not a snake.

Dumb atheist.

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#640848 Jul 14, 2013
Dave Nelson wrote:
<quoted text>
If you believe what you just wrote then you are an insincere believer in a strictly material consciousness, and have a fuzzy definition of consciousness.
Your physical condition affects your thinking and consciousness on an ongoing basis. Plus, getting drunk or drugged is notorious for it. Loud music or a very uncomfortable environment can drive you up the wall. Reactions to stimuli shape your thinking.
Your brain would be totally reactive to what goes on in the body.
To keep an even keel would require another level of programming perched above the action/reaction functions of the brain that can detect those excess inputs and direct the release of chemicals in the right places to counteract. But it has to be detached from the influences somehow, and running on its own, so to speak.
Where is this magical part of the brain?
Do you know how drugs affect the brain? It's not like when you take a drug, it just floats around in your body and therefore changes your consciousness - it passes the blood brain barrier and attaches to a particular receptor(s), thereby effecting a change in consciousness. Some drugs can also attach to receptors throughout the body, but this does not produce a strictly psychological effect, it produces a somatic effect, which can indirectly affect consciousness.

As I have said, yes, a transplant could potentially cause some psychological effects, but this is not the same as saying that a heart transplant would directly effect a change in consciousness. You are confusing the fact that external factors can affect consciousness with the half baked notion that the heart is somehow integral to the thinking process.

Now you are going with the more general "reactions to stimuli can shape thinking." No, really? A profound observation, truly. You suggested earlier that a heart transplant might directly produce a split personality by some unknown mechanism - this is patently absurd and can be dismissed out of hand. You also brought up the term "heartache" as if it wasn't a colloquialism. Sure, physical conditions in the body can affect consciousness in a general way, but there is no reason to think that a heart transplant would directly create an entirely different personality. You are displaying a profound misunderstanding of how the brain and body work together. The fact that the brain and body can maintain homeostasis is not in any way indicative of some "higher level of programming."

“I speak my mind”

Since: Sep 10

It hurts to bite my tongue

#640849 Jul 14, 2013
timn17 wrote:
Btw, I liked your attempt at an insult at the end there - because I support the morally and fiscally more reasonable option, I either don't work for a living or "I enjoy supporting the irresponsibility of others?" That's when you know you're fighting a losing battle, when you have to resort to stupid personal attacks - it's made even funnier by the fact that you always whine about people "insulting" you in one way or the other.
While we're acting like children, I might as well tell you that apparently, truth, you never went to school, as the ability to discern the difference between "elude" and "allude" seems to *elude* you. Well, it's never too late, I suppose (I'm *alluding* to the fact that you still have time to learn basic grammar).
Lol...well if you took that as an insult, perhaps you should consider your position on the matter. I mean it's an either/or situation. Either you don't work so you aren't bothered about how tax dollars are spent...because you aren't providing them....OR you do work and you enjoy paying taxes to foot the bill for others irresponsibilities. One of the two has to apply. If you're insulted...then again...you need to consider your position on the matter as a whole. As for elude or allude...geez...got me there...darn it and I so wanted to teach grammar!

Catcher1

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#640850 Jul 14, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes. It is that old book you're ignorant of.
You DO understand what ignorant means, yes?
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart believed one need not create a definition of obscenity. "I know it when I see it," he said.

That's the way it is for me with ignorance.

With you here, I see it all the time.

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
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 2 min Joe Fortuna 71,519
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 9 min Peter Ross 447,397
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 45 min kent 699,388
How is it possible that God has always existed?? 50 min Doctor REALITY 14
School Fails Girl For Believing In God 1 hr Doctor REALITY 2
"O.J. hit me while he (BLEEPED!) me! 1 hr Doctor REALITY 4
James Comey's conflicted TWO FACES 5 hr Dang Jersey Piney 96