It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Idiot Christians

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 13 2005 @ 04:56 PM
link   
Well, as many of you have noticed, there have been a lot of threads and posts out there to let us Christians know just how stupid and weak willed we are. All of our group of "sheeple" can amount to nothing, apparently, and are dumber than a rock. Personally, I could care less what you say about me as an individual, call me arrogant, stupid, a loser, etc. and you won't get much of a reaction out of me. However, I've never really been too into biggotry. In fact, it tends to upset me a bit. So, to show all of you "enlightened" piles of meat (was originally souls, but I realized that y'all don't believe in those) who, exactly, is so much stupider than yourselves, I compiled this list with a brief description of the individual. If you want to know more about them, you can google them (they're rather famous) or just U2U me and I'll point you in the direction of discovery.

This is limited to only idiot scientists who are on board with that idiot concept of creationism and have publicly stated so. For a list of Christian scientists (not the denomination), I'd need quite a bit more time since evolution hasn't been around for all that long.

Gerald E. Aardsma (physicist and radiocarbon dating specialist)
Louis Agassiz (developed the study of glacial geology and of ichthyology)
Charles Babbage (generally held to be the father of computing)
Steven A. Austin (Geologist, author of numerous papers including publication in the peer-reviewed journal International Geology Review (1999))
Georges Cuvier (helped develop sciences of comparative anatomy and vertebrate paleontology)
Humphry Davy (helped develop science of thermokinetics)
Donald B. DeYoung (physicist, specializing in solid-state, nuclear science and astronomy)
Ambrose Fleming (helped develop science of electronics / invented thermionic valve)
William Herschel (helped develop science of galactic astronomy / discovered double stars / developed the Global Star Catalog)
James P. Joule (developed reversible thermodynamics)
Gary E. Parker (biologist and paleontologist)
Blaise Pascal (helped develop science of hydrostatics / invented the barometer)
Louis Pasteur (helped develop science of bacteriology / discovered the Law of Biogenesis / invented fermentation control / developed vaccinations and immunizations)

Well, the list goes on and on. I just chose a few names that jumped out at me that I knew from my own studies (stupid studies?
). So many idiots, including paleontology idiots. So remember, the next time you're enjoying a glass of milk, some creationist idiot Christian made that milk safe for you to drink. What a bunch of morons!



Odd

posted on May, 13 2005 @ 06:25 PM
link   
represent.

the Christ-bashing is getting old, especially the bit where they entirely ignore the new testament and get hung up on metaphors in the old.



posted on May, 13 2005 @ 08:41 PM
link   
Good post JungleJake. I cannot believe the biggotry and ignorance that ive seen here that has been tolerated. I thought the whole point of this sight was to deny ignorance, but I guess when it comes to religious beliefs the deny part is just thrown out the window isnt it?

You might want to add Isaac Newton to that list. He was a catholic, and Im not sure but I think Ivan Lupis the inventer of the torpedo was catholic also.



posted on May, 14 2005 @ 12:41 AM
link   
JUNGLE...you sound so angry in your post. Remember that people usually dont like to be preached to...i know i don't.But instead reach them like jesus did...love,truth, and understanding...that to me is the key...religion sux...but God is free.

God gave us free will. Some of us abuse that freedom. And here we are now speculating. what a gift that is...to talk amoungst eachother like this...truly a gift...



one love,
vamp



posted on May, 14 2005 @ 12:59 AM
link   
Here's some more

Arthur Eddington, an important mathematical cosmologist, was a Quaker.
Georges Lemaître, a Roman Catholic priest, proposed the Big Bang theory.
Henry F. "Fritz" Schaefer is one of the foremost theoretical chemists of our day.
William Phillips was co-recipient of the 1997 Nobel Prize in Physics.
Francis Collins is the director of the U.S. Human Genome Project.
Rustum Roy, one of the world's foremost materials scientists, holds three chairs at the Pennsylvania State University.

ONe of my favorites

Robert Boyle (1791-1867)
One of the founders and key early members of the Royal Society, Boyle gave his name to "Boyle's Law" for gasses, and also wrote an important work on chemistry. The Encyclopedia Britannica says of him: "By his will he endowed a series of Boyle lectures, or sermons, which still continue, "for proving the Christian religion against notorious infidels."... As a devout Protestant, Boyle took a special interest in promoting the Christian religion abroad, giving money to translate and publish the New Testament into Irish and Turkish. In 1690 he developed his theological views in The Christian Virtuoso, which he wrote to show that the study of nature was a central religious duty." Boyle wrote against atheists in his day (the notion that atheism is a modern invention is a myth), and was clearly much more devoutly Christian than the average in his era.

Oh i forgot to continue the theme of this thread:

I am Jesus' little lamb,
Ever glad at heart I am;
For my Shepherd gently guides me,
Knows my need, and well provides me,
Loves me every day the same,
Even calls me by my name.

Day by day, at home, away,
Jesus is my Staff and Stay.
When I hunger, Jesus feeds me,
Into pleasant pastures leads me;
When I thirst, He bids me go
Where the quiet waters flow.

Who so happy as I am,
Even now the Shepherd's lamb?
And when my short life is ended,
By His angel host attended,
He shall fold me to His breast,
There within His arms to rest.

BAAAAAA!



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 02:02 PM
link   
I left Newt out because he was a pre-Dawrinian scientist. Since Darwin came along, the general mentality has become either you're a Christian or you're a scientist, but you can't be both.

As to sounding angry, to a degree that is what I was going for, but it didn't legitimately express how I was feeling. It was done in imitation of one of ATS's members. I'll not name the person, if I did it well, y'all will know, and if not, I don't want to offend anyone


...Well, offend them any more than is usual



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 04:02 PM
link   
I tend to agree with the premise of your posting.

However..dont let these people put you on a string ..this is what they specalize in. Causing confusion is what many of them take pride in.

They are themselves not scientists...the bulk of them..just people who like to read alot in this field. Most scientists are to busy in their fields to do postings on a forum like this.

There is a common fingerprint among these non believers...most of them.
There is a glaring lack of humility in them. Lots of self promotion in their postings. You can tell by the postings eventually being reduced to namecallng and labeling. This is a tactic you never want to allow them to drag you into JungleJake as it is confusion after the author of confusion. This is self explainitory if you are as knowlegable as I am assuming you are.
The Humanistic tendency is to boast and self promote. A proper scientist is humble/pragmatic and lets their work speak for them. A huge difference in that and what you see happeing in many of these boards.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 07:11 PM
link   
I found the information in your post interesting, but I failed to see the point of it. This isn't an attack, by the way.

I think the point you are trying to make is Christians aren't stupid. Am I correct? Sure there are lots of believers who made important discoveries, but surely they made those discoveries because they were intelligent people rather than just because they were Christians?

I come across lots of different people in these fora, but the Christian contingent are easily recognisible. I would be the last to say that these folks are anything less than intelligent and articulate.

While their Christian beliefs certainly color their arguments, that is fine by me. Everyone's opinions are based on a mixture of knowledge, experience and often, beliefs.

It is when their beliefs get in the way of the topic at hand, or as seems to happen quite often, their beliefs BECOME the topic hand, people do tend to get antsy.

Unless the topic being discussed is either religion or something similar, I think knowing whether you are a Christian or not is totally irrelevant. Your beliefs should be your own private sanctuary, not a flashing billboard behind your posts.

Nobody is calling you stupid. Lets debate heartily and share our opinions. But lets try and keep religion out of discussions in which what religion you are is irrelevant.

Deny Ignorance.



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Odd
represent.

the Christ-bashing is getting old, especially the bit where they entirely ignore the new testament and get hung up on metaphors in the old.



ditto, lets bash the jews or the muslims now. or is that not pc?



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by KrazyIvan

Originally posted by Odd
represent.

the Christ-bashing is getting old, especially the bit where they entirely ignore the new testament and get hung up on metaphors in the old.



ditto, lets bash the jews or the muslims now. or is that not pc?


Jeez, whatever happened to "turn the other cheek" and "love thy neighbour"?????

Are these true Christians talking??



posted on May, 18 2005 @ 11:42 PM
link   
Which list do you think is bigger, christians who are scientists who beleive in evolution or your list??

Aslo, you are aware that at least some of those guys either predate or co-existed with Darwin, right??

What does it matter what they beleive anyway, aren't their reasons for beleif whats important?

Also, what do you mean 'on board with creationism", and which creationism, Old Earth or Young Earth? If more beleive in Old Earth than Young Earth, does that mean that the bible is wrong?


Croat
thought the whole point of this sight was to deny ignorance, but I guess when it comes to religious beliefs the deny part is just thrown out the window isnt it?

Not for nothing, but its sort of silly to cheer a post that says 'creationism must be right, because these smart guys thought it was' as 'denying ignorance'.

And, newton, again, he existed before Darwin, so he can't very well have been an evolutionist.

junglejake
Since Darwin came along, the general mentality has become either you're a Christian or you're a scientist, but you can't be both. [/quoite]
Perhaps thats the idea amoung creationists, but thats certainly not the idea amoung scientists. Science is objective, it doesn't matter what one's religion is. Also, when darwin first came up with the basic ideas behind his theory, he himself was a christian. I think that its generalyl agreed that he lost his faith later in his life, apparently over the long and drawn out death of one of his young daughters. But he didn't go apostate in order to come up with his rather sensible theory.



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 07:57 AM
link   
Keep religion out of discussions...or even what religion!!
Wow!!! That must be textbook public education now days.
If this is the mantra ..we'd better not talk about science as to some in here it is their religion..and devoutly. Just as politics is a religion to some ..and devoutly.

Only public education can get one to make such a intelligent statement and have it pass for excellence.
Even scientists like anthropologists/archeologists know how to catalogue
a human dig or site...evidence of worship is one of the main ones..but perhapsed we'd better not discuss this!!!! See what I mean???

Contrary to "excellence in public education that passes for intelligence now days...Religion is one of the key indicators of how far a person will go to acquire their beliefs or conversely shove them down someone elses throats...as is obvious by some of the postings on these boards. Certain religious beliefs are ..the sole determinant...in how far some people will go.
But we dont ever want to discuss that..of course. Especially Christian religion...no no no...dont discuss this one in particular. This view will not be discussed in public education .ever.

Lets talk about the religion of "Politics" . It is obvious to even the most casual observer who can think outside the standard mantra that politics is a very devout religion among many in this country. Now for the next critical question ....most important..but perhapsed we'd better not discuss it...ever..we might give away the name of this brand of faith.

The question in this religion is ..how far will this religion of "Politics" go to achieve its goals..or objectives.???? What are the moral limits in this "Religious system"???
You see..how easy it is..but we'd better not discuss it or think about politics as a religion with devout adherants. That would be immoral..or at least questionable.

How about education ..is that a religion with devout adherants.???
Think this one through carefully!!! Remember ..politicians are deep into education and the education system. But perhapsed we'd better not discuss this brand of religion. What are the moral limits on Education ..oh ..sorry .we'd better not discuss this too.

You get the point yet???
You can pick any topic...but to people who think in terms of how great men are and to whom they owe their allegance...they never want to make the association with a religious belief. This for good reason!!! The Christian will discern the name of their god.

Once you make the jump to not owing any allegance to God...there is no limit...some of the postings here show this just in basic civilities. And I am now talking basic civilities. Watch some of the postings on this board..on religion , faith , spirituality. Look for the things that are missing...not just what you see...look on the other side of the coin...use radar if you have it.

lol lol..get the point yet..???
I am being facitious of course...in some of my posting but in order to make a point. I hope it doesnt escape some. There is a point to be made here..

Evolution is core..to determining to whom one owes their allegiance....it was developed for that very result and fed politically through public education ..for that very purpose...and has been remarkably successful.
Especially among young people who mostly think and express with their emotions..as is clearly noted by some of the posts here on these sites. It cannot be a accident ..in pubic schools and colleges that you turn out athiests.

I am astonished ..sometimes how onsided thinking can sometimes pass for education or excellence..today. I shouldn't be ...but I often am.

Thanks for your time and patience,
Orangetom



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by orangetom1999
Evolution is core..to determining to whom one owes their allegiance....it was developed for that very result and fed politically through public education ..for that very purpose...and has been remarkably successful.
Especially among young people who mostly think and express with their emotions..as is clearly noted by some of the posts here on these sites. It cannot be a accident ..in pubic schools and colleges that you turn out athiests.

Care to actually prove public schools create atheists? I vaguely remember you concluding that I must have gone to public schools because I am an atheist.. [way off the mark of course] given only 1% apx of the world's population is atheist that is a flawed and ignorant presumption.

I do not know what people expect in public schools.. perhaps they would like science to teach kids the world is the centre of the universe because the bible say so? Maybe that rivers a formed by giant snakes? Perhaps we can teach them how the greek gods play with people's lives? Maybe.. instead of disecting frogs in science.. kids can learn ancient mummifying teachniques so that frogs can be quarenteed admittence into the after life. Kids could learn how to mix potions ect.. and the other kids could pray for their damned souls while they do it, make crusifixes in wood class etc. etc.
You can't have religion in public schools for the simple fact that some religions consider other ones to be 'evil'.. and you can't choose to teach one culture's beliefs over others.
Science.. well science is based of facts.. it would be negligent for teachers to teach them fiction.



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
Which list do you think is bigger, christians who are scientists who beleive in evolution or your list??

Well, the list of Christians who believe in evolution; I left a lot out of my list.


Aslo, you are aware that at least some of those guys either predate or co-existed with Darwin, right??
The ones I put in the list I began with I am 99% sure were with or post Darwin. That's why I left Newton off the list. Also, as I said, the list is huge, I just chose a few people who jumped out at me due to running into their theories or names while looking into the sciences myself.



What does it matter what they beleive anyway, aren't their reasons for beleif whats important?

I can answer this at the same time I answer the question posed earlier asking the point of this thread. No, it doesn't matter what they believe when it comes to making discoveries. I put this here because there is a stigma in the western world these days and I have also seen it on ATS quite a bit that someone who is a Christian cannot be involved in science, they're mutually exclusive. This is not true, and I wanted to point that out.



Also, what do you mean 'on board with creationism", and which creationism, Old Earth or Young Earth? If more beleive in Old Earth than Young Earth, does that mean that the bible is wrong?

No, for two reasons. First, I don't exactly agree with the premise behind the young earth. As I've stated in previous threads, the Hebrew word used for day in the six days God created the earth can also mean age. This isn't addressed by the 6,000 year model, they just estimate based on the geneology how many years it has been since Adam and Eve. (It is interesting to note, by the way, that it is generally agreed that organized civilization began about 6,000 years ago.) The second reason is the failability of man. Just because the crowd interprets something one way doesn't mean its right. The truth is not dictated by the masses, it's dictated by the facts.




Croat
thought the whole point of this sight was to deny ignorance, but I guess when it comes to religious beliefs the deny part is just thrown out the window isnt it?

Not for nothing, but its sort of silly to cheer a post that says 'creationism must be right, because these smart guys thought it was' as 'denying ignorance'.
That wasn't the point of this thread. If you'd like me to elaborate on my reasons some more, I can.




junglejake
Since Darwin came along, the general mentality has become either you're a Christian or you're a scientist, but you can't be both. [/quoite]
Perhaps thats the idea amoung creationists, but thats certainly not the idea amoung scientists.
On this point we agree. Scientists don't believe this. However, armchair scientists, people like myself and other members here at ATS who aren't in scientific careers but like to research scientific concepts, because they're interesting, do. Those are the people I'm talking to, not the genuine scientists.

Rock, rock on!



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
That wasn't the point of this thread. If you'd like me to elaborate on my reasons some more, I can.

I understand the intention, but I think a better way to go about it would be to present christians, who are scientists, not creationists.



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

Originally posted by junglejake
That wasn't the point of this thread. If you'd like me to elaborate on my reasons some more, I can.

I understand the intention, but I think a better way to go about it would be to present christians, who are scientists, not creationists.


As I stated in my intro, I was limiting the list to those who believe in creationism. The reason for this is the same stigma concept. Check out any of the hundreds of creationism vs evolution threads here on ATS and you'll see a common theme among some of the evolutionists -- if you don't agree with them, you're a complete fool. I was also showing that honored scientists who have contributed a lot to the development of science, including fields like geology, palentology, and genetics were and are also believers in creationism.



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
The reason for this is the same stigma concept. Check out any of the hundreds of creationism vs evolution threads here on ATS and you'll see a common theme among some of the evolutionists -- if you don't agree with them, you're a complete fool. I was also showing that honored scientists who have contributed a lot to the development of science, including fields like geology, palentology, and genetics were and are also believers in creationism.

There is a stigma with creationalism because it is not a science.. it's an assumption that god created everything but has no scientific evidence to back that up [and 'young' earth creationalism is laughable]. Perhaps 'intelligent design' could be backed up by the same facts.. but that would support evolution anyway and there is no way to scientifically prove a god created everything.



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 01:46 PM
link   
The intelligent design theory does not depend on evolution to work. Intelligent design can apply to the young earth creation example, too.

This proves my point, though, too. Well respected scientists, like Louis Pasteur, believe(d) in creation, intelligent design. There is evidence backing up the young earth model, too. However, this evidence is generally ignored by the armchair scientist because there is no explanation for it that fits within current evolutionary theories. While trained evolutionists address these issues, resources for those of us who do not have doctorates, such as Scientific American, do not address or even recognise the evidence. So, for the general public, it appears creation theory has no backing. Proponents of evolution aren't going to go out of their way to point out to the media the holes they're working on, and creationists who do so are condemned as religious zealots who just don't want to see the truth.



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 03:16 PM
link   
GOOD POST JAK... and this the honest opinion of me ..."The AntiChrist" ...lol... its true , i have seen many people complaining about "abusive" posts, but when it comes to "christian Bashing".... its opne game...

Persoanly i ma not a christian but i am married to one, and therefore i can see what going on... and maybe i am more of a Christian that i know ... but thats not the point. the point is there are mnay post in this board that have no other intetion but to attempt to humiliate anyone who follows the christian Faith. I sadly have to say that many "christian denominations", have brought it to themselves by spending CENTURIES judging and humilating themsleves...

But once we are suppose to have passed the middleages, it would be nice to see people read before they spew they're hatred ...



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
The second reason is the failability of man. Just because the crowd interprets something one way doesn't mean its right. The truth is not dictated by the masses, it's dictated by the facts.


How interesting that a Christian would say this. Does anyone else find this kind of ironic?

So you're trying to tell me that the whole Christian faith is based on facts and not dictated by the masses? And what facts excactly are you referring to?...I hope you dont mean the ones in the bible.



new topics




 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join