Attn: Atheist...read the last line of the first post...

[Ricter]

Quote from Kassz007:

She conveniently gets around that argument by saying god created evolution...

It's just like when I ask some religious people questions about god which they don't know the answer to. The response I get is usually something along the lines of "We as humans cannot understand why god does this and why god does that, only he knows because he is god." Total cop out...the worst part about it is most of them believe that shit.

Not much of a "worst part", really. The belief comforts them. *shrug*, no harm done.

 

[stu]

Quote from jem:

Stu you are such a child when it comes to faith.

One statement is virtually axiomatic which includes the name of God. (Implict in Palin's statement is the concept of "if God exits or I believe God is real" in that context Palins statement is self evident. )

Your statement limits the powers of God. Big deal?

Once again someone brings up God and you go nuts.

Try applying logic instead of your knee jerk emotions.

I used your exact words except only for cannot instead of can / this not her.

Now you might do well to ask yourself, how could that possibly be either knee jerk or nuts to anyone other than a knee jerking nutter.

Many an exploiter of religious bullshit like Sara Palin and plain lunatics like yourself demonstrate exactly the same thing - the use of argument which they wrongly assume they are somehow magically immune from.

Well as can be easily noted you are not immune, and your own foolish argument bites you right back.

How come your own words seem illogical to you when I use them, but not so when you do?

Clue : you are delusional.



Here try it once more:

Quote from jem:
what facts do you have which refute her statement

He can create an evolutionary process that allows species to change and adapt.

what facts do you have which refute this statement:
He cannot create an evolutionary process that allows species to change and adapt.



YOU own that ridiculous argument dimwit. Not I.

 

[Kassz007]

Quote from Ricter:

Not much of a "worst part", really. The belief comforts them. *shrug*, no harm done.

Very true. To each his own I suppose. I just get angry when I picture a middle aged man (preacher) who makes his living by asking for donations from little old ladies on fixed income, who happily oblige in order to avoid a place called hell.

 

[killthesunshine]

Quote from jem:

Stu you are such a child when it comes to faith.

One statement is virtually axiomatic which includes the name of God. (Implict in Palin's statement is the concept of "if God exits or I believe God is real" in that context Palins statement is self evident. )

Your statement limits the powers of God. Big deal?

Once again someone brings up God and you go nuts.

Try applying logic instead of your knee jerk emotions.

why don't you prove god exists rather..

disproving "stu" is logical

try THAT on for size

ps "faith" is not substantive proof

 

[151]

Quote from vhehn:

before we can debate about what he could do you would first have to provide some evidence that there is a "he"

Absolutely untrue

 

[151]

Quote from smilingsynic:

The facts are clear that humans share a common ancestor with apes and monkeys. Indeed, humans ARE apes.

Humans arrived on the scene hundreds of million years AFTER amphibians crawled out of the water onto land. This is supported by the fossil evidence.

It does not matter that Ms. Palin does not "feel" that way.

And as for God, God's existence is not a part of science. Science deals only with that which can be proven or tested. God does not fit into either of those.

Absolutely untrue number two

Who ever said science could not prove the existence of God was full of shit. As of yet science has not, and I certainly can't say that it will or will not.

 

[jem]

Quote from Kassz007:

I admit, that is a great cop out for the creationist...god CREATED evolution....brilliant, really.

This is a response of rational being.
He sees the statement as a cop out or at the very least a non argument - perhaps even a concession to the fact the "Creationist" adjusted her argument - perhaps in deference to the probability that evolution may be a solid theory.

--

Asswipe athiests - behave like Stu.

Dopey atheists say science proves there is no God.

---

Look I have no reason to prove there is a God in this argument or to an ignorant atheist-

Unlike the dopey atheists I do not make statements which can not be proved.

I understand that faith in God is based on belief and other concepts which may not arise to scientific proof.

Asswipe atheists do not seem to understand the difference between faith and fact.

How many times do I have to explain you can not prove the universe was not created. And I can not prove (nor am I trying to prove) my faith is scientific fact.

What I can say is your atheism is ignorant because you can not prove there is no God.

Non believers would be agnostic. Agnostic is quite rational. Atheism is delusional.

 

[stu]

Quote from jem:

"Creationist" adjusted her argument - perhaps in deference to the probability that evolution may be a solid theory.

It's not *may be* jem, it's *is*.

Quote from jem:

Unlike the dopey atheists I do not make statements which can not be proved.

.....and yet you made this statement which "can not be proved.".....

Quote from jem:

He can create an evolutionary process that allows species to change and adapt.
facts are facts.

Did you lie intentionally or is it that you just don't have the capacity to understand?


Now the default to name calling, for being stuck in your own mess of outright hypocricy and self-patronising deceit must be very frustrating. Sad you don't even realize .

Quote from jem:

Asswipe atheists .....

How very God like of you.

Quote from jem:

What I can say is your atheism is ignorant because you can not prove there is no God.

• What I can say is your theism is ignorant because you can not prove there is a God.

Both those are equally valid according to your own line of reasoning. They represent your argument. It is your own ignorant, and pointless argument.


.......and as for your agnostics...... simply theism, with a larger than usual indecision complex.

Quote from jem:

I understand that faith in God is based on belief and other concepts which may not arise to scientific proof.

It isn't *may not* jem, it's *don't*.

 

[smilingsynic]

Quote from 151:

Absolutely untrue number two

Who ever said science could not prove the existence of God was full of shit. As of yet science has not, and I certainly can't say that it will or will not.

Um, no. The evidence from DNA, as well as from the fossil evidence, points to the shared lineage of humans and other primates, in particular, chimpanzees.

If you don't know the science, then please do not participate. Work on eliminating your ignorance first.

 

[Free Thinker]

Asswipe atheists do not seem to understand the difference between faith and fact.

How many times do I have to explain you can not prove the universe was not created. And I can not prove (nor am I trying to prove) my faith is scientific fact.

What I can say is your atheism is ignorant because you can not prove there is no God.

Non believers would be agnostic. Agnostic is quite rational. Atheism is delusional. [/B]

jem, you silly deluded dope. its simple. faith is an emotion. fact is based on the concept of evidence.

absolute agnosticism is a cop out. You are conceding that you are not competent enough to make a rational analysis based on fact. There is no absolute certainty in this world, yet it is safe to make general assumptions based on proven facts. I know there is no big foot, I know there are no wizards and witches or god, because I put my trust in the concept of verifiable evidence.