Jump to content

Az Shooter Was An Atheist


Recommended Posts

Most rapes in this country are done by christians too.
Funny, but I posted things that are provable to defend my position, you posts make believe stuff.
But I really don't think this is true about science any more.
Sure..we already did the heavy lifting, inventing Calculus, medicine, astronomy, etc. Now you guys want to run things.Again, how is this different than what I said about you guys being parasites, living off the accomplishments of your hosts' body of work?
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 107
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I assume you are at least chuckling when you post stuff like this...
Laughing at how sad their arguments are?I guess I would, if I wasn't so depressed by the waste of potential I see in vb.Except for his fashion sense, no potential there at all.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I guess I was just looking at religious vs. not.But if it's Christian vs. atheist, don't Christians win?
It's all about BG being wrong. He said that most scientific discoveries were made by christians.
Sure..we already did the heavy lifting, inventing Calculus, medicine, astronomy, etc. Now you guys want to run things.Again, how is this different than what I said about you guys being parasites, living off the accomplishments of your hosts' body of work?
Math and medicine were invented by guys who believed in Zeus.Most of the "christian" contributions to those things were from guys who had to pretend to be christian in order to avoid being thrown in a dungeon full of horny priests.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Funny, but I posted things that are provable to defend my position, you posts make believe stuff.Sure..we already did the heavy lifting, inventing Calculus, medicine, astronomy, etc. Now you guys want to run things.Again, how is this different than what I said about you guys being parasites, living off the accomplishments of your hosts' body of work?
The irony is that after Augustine told everyone what was actually in the bible it had the effect of stifling free thought and sent humanity into a thousand year period know a the "Dark Ages". During that period, the only two notable inventions were the waterwheel and the windmill. In fact, a 1000 years after they got rid of the Romans, the best roads in Europe were those same roads that the Romans had built. Yeah, Christians have always been all about science. If it wasn't for them my great great grandfather would have had a Jet Pack most likely.
Link to post
Share on other sites
The irony is that after Augustine told everyone what was actually in the bible it had the effect of stifling free thought and sent humanity into a thousand year period know a the "Dark Ages". During that period, the only two notable inventions were the waterwheel and the windmill. In fact, a 1000 years after they got rid of the Romans, the best roads in Europe were those same roads that the Romans had built. Yeah, Christians have always been all about science. If it wasn't for them my great great grandfather would have had a Jet Pack most likely.
If it wasn't for atheist, we would have no more wars, hundreds of millions of more people alive, and a prosperous and viable global community sharing our troubles and successes.It is fun to make stuff up and then use it to prove the other side wrong.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Laughing at how sad their arguments are?I guess I would, if I wasn't so depressed by the waste of potential I see in vb.Except for his fashion sense, no potential there at all.
I can see that. Just think of how many converts youd acquire if that big, sciency brain was on your side.brainsssssbrainssss
Link to post
Share on other sites
If it wasn't for atheist, we would have no more wars, hundreds of millions of more people alive, and a prosperous and viable global community sharing our troubles and successes.It is fun to make stuff up and then use it to prove the other side wrong.
You mean you don't actually believe this?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Christians love science and are motivated by scientific discovery and analysis. A good illustration of this is the way they dismiss evolution out of hand, mostly because it's too difficult to understand and/or because it is at odds with what the Bible says. Honestly, the two main reasons that many Christians are anti-evolution are: One, because it's simply too hard to understand (Intelligent Design), or Two, because it disagrees with the Bible (YEC). Scientific method: hypothesize, experiment, theorize, experiment experiment experiment, adjust theory, experiment experiment experiment, make sure theory agrees with ancient religious text, scrap it entirely if it doesn't.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I like how you threw in that "honestly" there as if you actually had some basis for saying that.
Who says I don't have a basis for saying that? Intelligent design supposes that, because evolution is so complicated, it must have been designed by a Creator. The other main anti-evolution platform is the YEC belief, which asserts that the theory of evolution is entirely false because it is completely other than what the Bible says.
Link to post
Share on other sites
If it wasn't for atheist, we would have no more wars, hundreds of millions of more people alive, and a prosperous and viable global community sharing our troubles and successes.It is fun to make stuff up and then use it to prove the other side wrong.
Being pattern seeking, storytelling, mythmaking animals, I suppose it's our redisposition to create myths, but your side does elevate them to the highest level and never let go of them.
Link to post
Share on other sites
That's different than saying somebody believes in creation because evolution is too hard to understand.
Barely. The idea that evolution is too complicated/complex to be a natural unguided process can certainly be connected to a failure to fully understand the intricate natural processes that evolution explains. ID is an easy way out. 'Wow, you're right, the eye really is incredibly complex and could not have evolved without a designer!' No, you personally don't understand the complexities, and therefore assume that if it's beyond your understanding, it must be supernatural. If you (the hypothetical you) understood the processes better, you wouldn't need a supernatural explanation.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Being pattern seeking, storytelling, mythmaking animals, I suppose it's our redisposition to create myths, but your side does elevate them to the highest level and never let go of them.
High Five...for consistency.Why doesn't that trait transfer better to my golf game though?????
Link to post
Share on other sites
Barely. The idea that evolution is too complicated/complex to be a natural unguided process can certainly be connected to a failure to fully understand the intricate natural processes that evolution explains. ID is an easy way out. 'Wow, you're right, the eye really is incredibly complex and could not have evolved without a designer!' No, you personally don't understand the complexities, and therefore assume that if it's beyond your understanding, it must be supernatural. If you (the hypothetical you) understood the processes better, you wouldn't need a supernatural explanation.
When I asked for a simple flow chart that showed the migration from a single cell organism to a complex life form I was told it was too hard to do.Pretty sad from a side that 'knows' how evolution works and bases their world view on it.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Who says I don't have a basis for saying that? Intelligent design supposes that, because evolution is so complicated, it must have been designed by a Creator. The other main anti-evolution platform is the YEC belief, which asserts that the theory of evolution is entirely false because it is completely other than what the Bible says.
Curious, when we send people to Mars, if we find an anti-gravity machine sitting in the middle of the desert, will we first assume it was placed there by an intelligent life-form? Or that is sprung up on its own by random chance?What about a Toaster Oven with a perfect setting for Hot Pockets?
Link to post
Share on other sites
When I asked for a simple flow chart that showed the migration from a single cell organism to a complex life form I was told it was too hard to do.Pretty sad from a side that 'knows' how evolution works and bases their world view on it.
That's basically an illustration of what I'm saying. Something as preposterously complex and intricate as "the migration from a single cell organism to a complex life form" cannot be illustrated in "a simple flow chart." Rather than seek out the complicated answer, you dismissed it because it couldn't be explained in 2 minutes.
Link to post
Share on other sites
That's basically an illustration of what I'm saying. Something as preposterously complex and intricate as "the migration from a single cell organism to a complex life form" cannot be illustrated in a "simple flow chart." Rather than seek out the complicated answer, you dismissed it because it couldn't be explained in 2 minutes.
So we could draw up a simple flow chart to one single complex organism, let's say a Hippo?You guys dismiss out of hand any questions about the process with the whole "You don't understand evolution" yet when I ask for an explanation I get..it's too complex.I understand, you have a process that flies in the face of everything we know about time's effect on everything, that with time things decay into a less complex system...always.But you base your 'science' on a process that refuses to integrate with that truth.That's where your faith comes in I guess.Mine came in sooner is all.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Barely. The idea that evolution is too complicated/complex to be a natural unguided process can certainly be connected to a failure to fully understand the intricate natural processes that evolution explains. ID is an easy way out. 'Wow, you're right, the eye really is incredibly complex and could not have evolved without a designer!' No, you personally don't understand the complexities, and therefore assume that if it's beyond your understanding, it must be supernatural. If you (the hypothetical you) understood the processes better, you wouldn't need a supernatural explanation.
I don't agree with that conclusion. If Mr. Hypothetical fully understood the complexities of evolution, does that necessarily preclude him from thinking those complexities came from the Intelligent Designer?
Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't agree with that conclusion. If Mr. Hypothetical fully understood the complexities of evolution, does that necessarily preclude him from thinking those complexities came from the Intelligent Designer?
You mean like A.E. Wilder Smith?3 PhDs etc.Yea, he goes for ID
Link to post
Share on other sites
So we could draw up a simple flow chart to one single complex organism, let's say a Hippo?You guys dismiss out of hand any questions about the process with the whole "You don't understand evolution" yet when I ask for an explanation I get..it's too complex.I understand, you have a process that flies in the face of everything we know about time's effect on everything, that with time things decay into a less complex system...always.But you base your 'science' on a process that refuses to integrate with that truth.That's where your faith comes in I guess.Mine came in sooner is all.
BG's Law: All information must be reducable to a flow chart, otherwise it is false.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't agree with that conclusion. If Mr. Hypothetical fully understood the complexities of evolution, does that necessarily preclude him from thinking those complexities came from the Intelligent Designer?
No, but that's not what ID is about. I also wasn't saying that that's what all intelligent design believers believe, just that ID can be linked to an unwillingness to study the question scientifically.ID proposes that those complexities are, arbitrarily, too complex to have come about without a Creator. To me that implies either an unwillingness to take scientific facts at face value, or it implies an intentional distortion of facts in order to further a religious agenda. Or both. The fossil record has nothing to tell us about God.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand, you have a process that flies in the face of everything we know about time's effect on everything, that with time things decay into a less complex system...always.
I'm sorry, but you sound like Kent Hovind. Yes, everything dies and decays eventually. That means that order can't also be created over time? I don't even know what you're talking about. According to you we should be running around clubbing each other with bones, because technology is becoming ever less-complex. Are rocks and pebbles thrown into more and more random alignments as random waves crash over them? Or do they become more and more ordered over time?
Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm sorry, but you sound like Kent Hovind. Yes, everything dies and decays eventually. That means that order can't also be created over time? I don't even know what you're talking about. According to you we should be running around clubbing each other with bones, because technology is becoming ever less-complex. Are rocks and pebbles thrown into more and more random alignments as random waves crash over them? Or do they become more and more ordered over time?
So given enough time, things should become more complex?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...