You're too stupid to be an Athiest

reply to post by JesusisTruth


Well, i have to disagree with what you said... modern humans have showed up in fossils 195,000 years ago... So saying 7 people were born per year until "we learned to have sex" would put the world's population at less than 1 million people by the 1800's... when in fact there were 1 billion people alive in at that time.

When transportation became commonplace people had more space to thrive and reproduce... hence the population boom in the last 150 years...

It's really not even science, more common sense than anything.. it's okay for us to let religion guide our lives but to let it blind us is not.

btw your avatar if off the hook. i love it.

Thanks


EDIT" My apologies to the OP on sidetracking the thread.


God Bless,
Falken


[edit on 22-7-2010 by Falken]

reply to post by JesusisTruth

Not that I'd use silly pictures to make a point against you or anything, JiT, but I'm not sure how you are running your numbers, since it isn't as low as you are assuming:

Historical Estimates of World Population

[edit on 22-7-2010 by babloyi]

ok babloyi. i apologize. that chart i don't agree too much with. ive seen different charts, but let's assume that's correct.

we had 7 million in 4,000 bc.
and 170 mill in 1 AD

you do the math.

that's 163 million difference in a mere 4,000 years. so say the world were a billion years old.

it doesn't add up. maybee the earth is like 12 thousand years old or so accordng to biblical standards i don't know. i know god made the earth the perfect size to time out mans rebellion.

actually that's my opinion. sorry for getting all testy.



falken.... i don't really agree with that considering it's modern sciences way of dating the layers of rock which i believe were caused by the flood.

if the guy was found in 195,000 he was the ONLY GUY on earth considering we had 1million people in 10,000 according to babliyos chart.


again i believe the layers were caused by flood.

it just doesn't add up because in a 200 year span we 7 times 1 billion.

the more people spread the larger the growthrate which would make it nearly impossible for the earth to be even a million years old.


so i disagree. falken.

peace/






[edit on 22-7-2010 by JesusisTruth]

[edit on 22-7-2010 by JesusisTruth]

heres some charts i found


www.booksaboutthefuture.com...


in 1750 ad we had under 1 billion. which if the world were a billion years old. we would have less than a person born every year until 1800.


www.theglobaleducationproject.org...


this one is incredible.

it shouldn't take us 1 billion years to equal 1 billion people and then we shoot up to 7 billion the next 200 years.

something isn't right with that.

anyways. we will all find out after death.


peace.

[edit on 22-7-2010 by JesusisTruth]

reply to post by JesusisTruth


Soemthing ain't right, allright...it's your REASONING! (lack of..)

Firstly....prior to record-keeping and the beginnings of the Industrial Age, ALL ideas of population sizes are purely estimates and speculations.

Aparently people who take the "bible" literally also take things like 'estimates' too literally, as well?

something isn't right with that.

Indeed....

...and the next sentence shows exactly what is WRONG with your "reasoning" --- and why you're barking down the wrong alley:

it shouldn't take us 1 billion years to equal 1 billion people and then we shoot up to 7 billion the next 200 years.

See your mistake yet?? Hope you will, in time. It's perhaps a better learning experience just guide someone to the revelation, rather than pointing it out directly...unless absolutely necessary, like if he/she gets stumped for the correct answer.


Now...I'm going to begin more and more to agree with the guy in the video in the OP...whatshisname again?? "Safran"

I'll give him two for the video title, at this point in time.....




[edit on 22 July 2010 by weedwhacker]

nice try wacker on making the christian look insane. it aint working.

the estimates are somewhat accurate considering how they do the estimates. if if they are off 1,000s it's still pretty close.

the fact is that we had 1 billion people in 1802.

ok.

atheist believe the earth is OVER 1 billion years old.


so lets say man evolved in year 100 million.

ok.



since that time we would of had ten people born every year. even after the first 20 million years pass. and more humans exist, still only ten people a year.


the estimates are baised on how they calculate deaths and births and family sizes.

and you think babliyo would use a chart as a non christian if he didn't have any credence.


would anybody use any charts.


the charts give us a ruff idea of how much people existed, during the industrial age which at tat time only 1 billion people existed.

that's not alot of people. it's simple math that it's nearly impossible for earth to be over 50,000 years old considering only 1 billion were alive in 1800.


.

reply to post by JesusisTruth


BZZZZZZ!!!!

Still wrong...but zeroing in closer....

so lets say man evolved in year 100 million.

Go to school, or at least do some Internet research. As I said, usually when one learns on one's own, the education is better, and the learning process is improved...the facts learned 'stick' better.

I'm not a teacher or anything...last thing I taught was when I was flight instructing, and that was a LONG time ago...but the principles of learning then were sound, and they are today as well.


Since this is a sorta "humour by YouTube" thread ( ?? ) I like this one a lot!! Ricky Gervais is a riot!!!

( "I mean, if you're a working-class Mum, Jesus is like an unpaid babysitter..." )







[edit on 22 July 2010 by weedwhacker]

thats it bzzzz... thats all you got.

you're just showing your prideful ignorance that way. the reason i said 100 million is because i don't believe in evolution.

ok... it's said to be 5 to 7 millions years ago.

still, there is noway on this planet we should only have 1 billion people by 1800.

and i see atheist using thos population charts all the time.





i dropped out of school in 10th grade. my learning aint the best, but, im looking at things through reality.


their estimmates are that mandking was at about around a couple million in 1 ad.

and yet humans live millions of years ago.

it's ridiculous.




[edit on 22-7-2010 by JesusisTruth]

reply to post by JesusisTruth


Still getting closer...down to just "millions of years ago"...baby steps.

and yet humans live millions of years ago.

But, still.....no.

No humans millions of years ago. ANCESTORS of humans, but no humans as is defined by the present-day examples.

Looks like the lesson plan requires a visual aid. Here's a snippet of text, you can follow the link afterwards, and explore and learn for yourself, at your own pace:

All people today are classified as Homo sapiens. They first began to appear nearly 200,000 years ago in association with technologies not unlike those of the early Neandertals. It is now clear that they did not come after the Neandertals but were their contemporaries. However, it is likely that both modern humans and Neandertals descended from Homo heidelbergensis.

Early Modern Homo sapiens


Keep in mind....people (and animals and plants) die. ALSO, picture the world a hundred thousand years ago. How much interaction was there between "tribes"??

NO technology to travel.

NO incentive to travel (other than when forced to, for survival).

AND...tremendously shorter life spans, infant mortality, etc. MUCH harsher environment to live in...brutal, actually.

Lots to ponder, to see why your "math" calculations are invalid......


Atheists are smart, this way....smarter than your average bear, actually.....you betcha!!


Speaking of "you betcha", if you follow recent American news, you may recall that catchphrase uttered by a "fundie" who is a few pages short of a full volume, in the brains department, if you know what I mean...she is the former half-Governor of Alaska, current embarrassment to humanity world-wide....but she came to mind as an example of the "fundies" lack of reasoning abilities...generally speaking, of course. There are exceptions....

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by babloyi

 

The thing is, I don't believe in any religion, yet I wouldn't call myself an atheist either.

Do I need help?

Yes my fine friend Chadwickus...you need help!

But guess what? I am here to provide the very help you need.


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/275a195fd441.jpg[/atsimg]


um.....we do not accept credit cards........CASH ONLY!

reply to post by KIZZZY


Bugger..only two?

Bumped for hilarity.

Originally posted by spy66
reply to post by Chadwickus

 

Good one.

The thing is Genesis Chapter 1 actually makes more scientific sense than the Big Bang theory does. If you look at Genesis chapter 1.. scientifically that is.
Genesis chapter 2 is a different story, when Lord God formed Adam from the dust on the Ground. Yeah, that's when you have to start to believe in magic. Or should i say! Have faith in magic.

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

You can't possibly be referring to standard science, when you say genesis 1 makes more scientific sense than Big Bang. Maybe you refer to some cottage-industry version of science; in which case it would be recommendable to ALSO know something about standard science.

reply to post by Chadwickus


Hey fellow west oz bro.

Nice topic. I've often thought something along these lines. Most Athiests (although I don't actually consider myself one of them) do not posses degrees in biology or genetics necessary to really put creationist in their place. Yet, every Creationist has practically memorised the entire Bible and the all arguements of the few 'scientists' who actually tow the creationist line.

It puts everyone who is not a biologist or geneticist at a distinct disadvantage when arguing with them as they have spent a lifetime memorising all arguments in their favour. Essentially you have a laymen argueing against a person who is an 'expert' in their field, despite the fact that field is bunk.

Also, for JesusisTruth, all ur graphs and numbers are completely invalid. As has been pointed out already anatomically modern humans only evolved 200,000 years ago. Up until probably 3000 years ago they lived and died no differently to any other animal. The death rate more or less equalled the birthrate which kept the population of humans at a more or less even rate. It has only been since the industrial revolution that worldwide living standards improved that the population could begin to grow significantly. And ever since then, the rate of technological innovation has only increased exponentially, hence causing exponential growth in the human population as well. If its any consolation you seem like a nice person and not nearly as crazy as most creationists

Originally posted by 1littlewolf
reply to post by Chadwickus

 

Hey fellow west oz bro.

Nice topic. I've often thought something along these lines. Most Athiests (although I don't actually consider myself one of them) do not posses degrees in biology or genetics necessary to really put creationist in their place. Yet, every Creationist has practically memorised the entire Bible and the all arguements of the few 'scientists' who actually tow the creationist line.

It puts everyone who is not a biologist or geneticist at a distinct disadvantage when arguing with them as they have spent a lifetime memorising all arguments in their favour. Essentially you have a laymen argueing against a person who is an 'expert' in their field, despite the fact that field is bunk.

Also, for JesusisTruth, all ur graphs and numbers are completely invalid. As has been pointed out already anatomically modern humans only evolved 200,000 years ago. Up until probably 3000 years ago they lived and died no differently to any other animal. The death rate more or less equalled the birthrate which kept the population of humans at a more or less even rate. It has only been since the industrial revolution that worldwide living standards improved that the population could begin to grow significantly. And ever since then, the rate of technological innovation has only increased exponentially, hence causing exponential growth in the human population as well. If its any consolation you seem like a nice person and not nearly as crazy as most creationists

edit on 28/6/2011 by 1littlewolf because: (no reason given)

edit on 28/6/2011 by 1littlewolf because: (no reason given)

Well thank you. Most creationist are nornmal. btw I gave you a star too for that post.

Ok we about 200,000 years ago when humans started to pop up. Considering sex drive is always going, it doesn't stop, it's still hard to believe that we had 1million people by 4000 BC...

That's a roughly 190,000 of reproduction. Even after the first 50,000 years you would think, that's a long time, we would sit at millions by then. I dunno, it just doesn't add up.

And i agree during the spread of technology and industrial age more births could be born, but you gotta remember that even during the indudtrial age planes didn't exist. Major highways ect.. We were still in horse carriages, and we still didn't have much travel options.

Technology began to boom just in the last century.


anyways cheers bro

reply to post by Chadwickus


I think Forest gump said it best...

Stupid is as stupid does?

If you find yourself being a "religionist"(?) without doing any study... just blindly believing what others tell you to believe, ya you're probably not too bright. But atheists have the same kind of people.

Many don't believe in God because they've had no experience with him/her/it... or they ask how could God exist when theres so much suffering in the world.

People don't consider suffering as a possible learning experience