Disproving atheists in 82 seconds

stu · Mar 13, 2012

Quote from jem:

Keep up that strong ignorance by introducing unsupported and irrelevant b.s. - while the other guy... introduces top scientists.

Way to go team a-t-h-e-i-s-m.

did you even watch the video's, do you realize how fricken ignorant you are keeping yourself... about science... just to support and outdated world view dumped upon you by idiots with a similar agenda?

I doubt you could introduce yourself at a party . What you introduce is a version of -take a scientist out of context sound bite pseudoscience - trying to make space for a sky wizard.

Doesn't wash, no matter how many times you repeat the same old tired horseshite.

stu · Mar 13, 2012

Quote from PHOENIX TRADING:

That explains it, so your anger at God is really a form of self-loathing of your own stupidity?

You are angry at an atheist why... because he won't acknowledge your imaginary friend?

bigarrow · Mar 13, 2012

How did this "god" design the universe ? What tools or methods were used for this design ?
Is this all you have for your god did it theory, a scientist said it appears designed.
What about your theory of the theory of how god came to be ? Is it one singular god or a couple of gods or are there many, and why?

PHOENIX TRADING · Mar 13, 2012

Quote from stu:

You are angry at an atheist why... because he won't acknowledge your imaginary friend?

#1) I don't have any imaginary friends.
#2) I'm not angry at atheists, I think they are arrogant sad little creatures.

PHOENIX TRADING · Mar 13, 2012

Quote from bigarrow:

Is it one singular god or a couple of gods or are there many, and why?

Depends on the observer doesn't it.
ref Heisenberg

jem · Mar 13, 2012

For stu...

Explain the context of these videos

Quote from jem:

to bigarrow and your other clowns...

if you listen to the video... this is the odds against one constant being set up the way it is by random chance.

I hope you all grasp that significance. That is a zero for every atom in the universe.

10^(10^30) or --- 10^(100000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000), i.e., 1 followed by a thousand billion billion billion zeros (i.e., 1 followed by a nonillion zeros).

And Penrose is...

Sir Roger Penrose OM FRS (born 8 August 1931) is an English mathematical physicist and Emeritus Rouse Ball Professor of Mathematics at the Mathematical Institute, University of Oxford and Emeritus Fellow of Wadham College. He has received a number of prizes and awards, including the 1988 Wolf Prize for physics which he shared with Stephen Hawking for their contribution to our understanding of the universe.[1] He is renowned for his work in mathematical physics, in particular his contributions to general relativity and cosmology. He is also a recreational mathematician and philosopher.

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

So if you want to argue the science... get the support of a scientist.

Brass · Mar 13, 2012

Quote from jem:

...I presented your darling Dawkins telling you that many scientists say the universe appears fine tuned...

Quote from Brass:

The appearance of design is not evidence of design. "Thought experiments" don't qualify as evidence. Neither do circular arguments.

Just because it "appears" to have been "designed" does not mean that Dawkins actually believes it was "designed." Did you not get the underlying rationale from reading his books? Did you read his books? Did you ready any of his books? Or are you just a sound bite enthusiast?

jem · Mar 13, 2012

Quote from Brass:

Just because it "appears" to have been "designed" does not mean that Dawkins actually believes it was "designed." Did you not get the underlying rationale from reading his books? Did you read his books? Did you ready any of his books? Or are you just a sound bite enthusiast?

I was going to ignore this, because I am worried I have been arguing with a person who does not comprehend... but you have been such a dick at times...

Do you understand the difference between evidence and conclusion?

I will try and teach on your level...

When you are watching a law show on t.v. and the visiting guest star makes a great legal argument to the jury... do you say wow good evidence, the show is over?

Or do you wait for your favorite star to come out and argue for a new way interpret that evidence - perhaps with the aid of the detective?

Or... when you were watching My Cousin Vinnny... did you think the boys really killed the guy at the mini mart after the prosecution presented evidence and rested?

<object width="640" height="360"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/EdCkrHa-pfY?version=3&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/v/EdCkrHa-pfY?version=3&hl=en_US&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="640" height="360" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

Free Thinker · Mar 13, 2012

Quote from PHOENIX TRADING:

That explains it, so your anger at God is really a form of self-loathing of your own stupidity?

how can a thinking person be angry at something that is a figment of a believers imagination? are you angry at the leprechauns?
willfull ignorance of believers is the stupidity i was talking about. like this little jem from a christian college.

"if conclusions contradict the word of God, the conclusions are wrong no matter how many scientific facts may appear to back them."biology textbook printed by conservative Christian publisher Bob Jones University Press

futurecurrents · Mar 13, 2012

Actually, studies have shown that the faithful are generally happier and more psychologically stable than atheists.