Are Atheists Air Brushing History?

reply to post by melatonin

---

You've really helped me to demonstrate this as true. Sure I need to reword it and develop the relationships further. Unity of character perhaps... the character of ungodliness perhaps? Or should I call it an unholy union? Hmmm thanks, I will keep working on it.

I will find some canard creationist to publish it. I'll dedicate it to mel OK? I'll send you a copy to frame on your wall OK?

[edit on 3/25/2008 by Bigwhammy]

Not at all. It's no more than a negative argument against evolution. It can be philosophy, it can be religious 'theory'. But until IDers actually do some proper science, then it remains pseudoscience.

Thus far for ID:

Number of scientific articles testing an ID hypothesis = 0
Number of popular books written = many
Number of school textbooks = two or three
Number of films = 1
Number of press-releases = too many to mention
Number of court cases lost for attempting to ram ID creationism into schools = 1

It's just creationism in a cheap tux. That's not to say it can't be science, they just need to actually try to do some. I've yet to see a proper scientific ID hypothesis which wasn't a negative argument against evolution. When you say goddidit, it can answer anything. Why x? Godwanteditthatway! Why y? Godwanteditthatway! Vacuous and useless in science.

Bad science. Bad theology, from what I hear. You don't need evidence, have faith

In whammy world, snakes talking, women made from ribs, and the flinstones as almost a documentary are true as well.

Take care, whammy. Good luck with the chemo, dude.

Well close, it wasn't a snake it was a reptilian angel being, the rib was an analogy for cloning, and I have no idea about the Flintstones part?

Yabba Dabba Doo

take care Mel!

i read a really good argument supporting ID that wasn't presented by a christian or muslim. in fact, the guy was a jew turned atheist.
many evolutionists ignore folks like him because there's no ammunition to use against his "religion", so maybe if they ignore him, he'll just go away.

that's not good science.
ignoring it because you can't use the normal "provided" argument is not
how science is supposed to work. religion may work that way, but science is not supposed to work that way, at least, according to the writings on empirical evidence.

one guy put it this way:

"Although science is not supposed to tolerate vague or double
standards, always insist that unconventional phenomena must be
judged by a separate, yet ill-defined, set of scientific rules. Do this
by declaring that "extraordinary claims demand extraordinary
evidence"--but take care never to define where the "ordinary" ends
and the "extraordinary" begins. This will allow you to manufacture
an infinitely receding evidential horizon, i.e., to define
"extraordinary" evidence as that which lies just out of reach at any
point in time."

www.eskimo.com...

Argument, schmargument. Evidence is what you need. Not rhetoric. Get a scientific hypothesis and go and test it vs. real-world.

Until then, pseudoscience.

reply to post by melatonin

---

It was an argument regarding genetics, specificially data discovered during the Genome Project, and it was quite interesting.

see you are already ignoring it and denouncing it and you don't even know what it says.

I have considered that. I guess I sort of like to be in denial if that is true. It's really disturbing. If it is we can't really do a damn thing about it. Jesus can... but all we can do is expose the lies and pray really. Do you see yourself as an agent of truth to expose them? I sort of do... that's why I like to help promote Guy and do stuff like this thread...

How can I denounce it when I haven't even seen what you're specifically talking about? I'm taking all I know about ID, and commenting about that. Take it to O&C and we'll discuss it there.

reply to post by Bigwhammy

---

Sorry, BW, you have confused me even more!

Your 'location' tag is Abraham's Bosom....but then you go off and talk about alien reptilians being the 'snake' from the Bible, and Adam's Rib (Yum!!!...expecially with barbeque sauce!) being an analogy to cloning...

Ummmm....Pick a belief, please!

Believe the Bible, in its inerrancy....OR...believe in the Human Race being a 'Grand Experiment'....but please DO NOT use the Bible in that scenario. It seems a little, well, disconnected!

reply to post by weedwhacker

---

It's hard to imagine you being anymore confused. Sorry I confused you further. That's just your ignorance of the Bible there whacker. It was not written in English. The Hebrew word was nacash. It does not mean snake. Please get a clue. Do not tell me about the Bible.



[edit on 3/25/2008 by Bigwhammy]

I'll remind you all again.

Be nice.
Be ON-TOPIC!
No personal snipes!

This thread is ten seconds from closed. I'm TIRED of spending all my time watching it for sniping.

ENOUGH!

Cuhail

reply to post by Bigwhammy

---

Not really no.
I just share what my research leads me to. And because Jehovah
condoned it following the events at the ToB (etemenanki, tower of babel), well, it's not my position to dethrone them. I leave that type of thing up to the real power brokers.

My point exactly.

Ya need to read it first, but what happens when it doesn't agree with you or the prevailing beliefs on the subject? Ignore him and in hopes that he'll take his ideas and go away, perhaps?

I really don't want to get whammy's thread closed, undo. I stated where I was coming from. You made some ambiguous claims about a jewish atheist, I answered with what I know.

You know where to take it. It's off-topic.

reply to post by undo

---

But you realize by disseminating information about them you attract their attention. You might inspire someone... like me or Guy Malone, who might try to fight what they are up to.

reply to post by melatonin

---

If you cover it up, then you are airbrushing it, which is the point of the thread. He's an ID'er, that isn't even a religious man, who came up with a feasible argument against evolution using the Genome Project as the source of his data, who's information isn't considered because there's no benefit in considering it, because

1) he's an atheist
and
2) it supports ID

But let's take this a different route.

German Higher Criticism was assigned the task of discovering proof that the bible was the most accurate document on the planet. As part of the curriculum at the German Universities of the day, they were going threw the ancient histories of various ancient cultures. So, it was decided since the topic was a current study and of interest to the students, they would start with the ancient Greek texts. It was determined that the ancient greeks couldn't write during the time frame their histories and epics were written, so obviously the bible was still the most accurate of the two documents.

Then they moved onto other ancient documents, including the Roman histories, until finally, all that remained was the bible. That is, until some thoughtful students spoke up and noted that the bible no longer had the support of history,since all the other histories were now considered myth.

So they threw it out too.
50 years later, after the invention of archaeology, it was discovered that the ancient greeks could write, but it was too late to correct the errors in the original understanding of it, because too many people of import had written lenghty dissertations on it and related issues, theses and so on.

The argument was put forth that to return to believing in myths was ridiculous, even though their original foundation for rejecting so much of ancient history was based on incorrect data.

THAT is atheism, airbrushing the heck outta history.

[edit on 25-3-2008 by undo]

On Hitler

Let's get back on topic then and discuss this claim that some atheist web sites try to make about Adolf Hitler. I got a copy of Mein Kampf from a neighbor who is a Nazi brought over in project paper clip The Atheists use a few of his crazy quotes to claim he was a Christian. For instance:

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord." (Mein Kampf)

However the contrast between Jesus and Hitler is obvious because Christ said "the meek shall inherit the earth." Conversely, Hitler called the Nazis "lords of the earth" (Mein Kampf, Vol 2, Ch 14).

Also in a book called Hitler's Table Talk (Adolf Hitler, London, Weidenfeld & Nicholson, 1953).


Now I do not think Hitler was an Atheist either

"We were convinced that the people need and require this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out".

(Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, Oxford University Press, 1942, cited in an Internet article by Doug Krueger.)

The communists were Atheists and Atheism is the state religion. I do not think that Hitler was an atheist, but he was not a Christian either. That is why I did not include him in the OP.

reply to post by undo

---

Wow... undo has his conspiracy going back far deeper than I started it out to be. It all fits together.

Friedrich August Wolf was the one that started the ball rolling by claiming Homer couldn't have possibly written "The Iliad and the Odyssey", because he said, Homer couldn't write, that none of the ancient greeks could write.

Later, they said Troy never existed, too. But it has since been dug up.
And of course, they claimed there was no historical support for the bible,so when archaeology started discovering things like the Epic of Gilgamesh and the Enuma Elish and the Story of Atrahasis, they claimed they were all fictitious too and that the writers of the bible just copied them.

So then archaeology digs up Gilgamesh's city. lol It just goes on and on and on.