What is with all the threads attacking atheism/atheists lately?

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


Most "proof" is subjective until we have objective means to verify it. Science takes pride in evolving and updating until absolutes can be determined. Science does not claim anything as fact until it has proper means to do so.

Evolution is an example of a theory AND a fact.

en.wikipedia.org...

Metaphysical theories "4th dimension" or "the multiverse" cannot be falsified, at least by objective means. Metaphysics can be formed using existing knowledge of the the universe (quantam mechanics) are are mathematically rationalised.

Theories such as "GOD" are the fiction of the man's mind and are not based on any evidence; logical or empirical; it's not being nasty or disrespectful, it's just the truth.

Agnostic Atheism is the open-minded stance that if God were to be proved then the Atheism would be happily renounced based on the newly found Gnostcisim. But remember, it's 1 thing proving whether "GOD" exists, it's another story trying to prove which religion best fits the God, if at all. Religion is man-made after all, not God made.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

Most "proof" is subjective until we have objective means to verify it. Science takes pride in evolving and updating until absolutes can be determined. Science does not claim anything as fact until it has proper means to do so.

Evolution is an example of a theory AND a fact.

I am sorry but you cannot have a theory and a fact at the same time.

Its just that some theories are more evolved than others!

Metaphysical theories "4th dimension" or "the multiverse" cannot be falsified, at least by objective means. Metaphysics can be formed using existing knowledge of the the universe (quantam mechanics) are are mathematically rationalised.

Your kidding me? A lot of scientists DISAGREE with the multiverse theory and think we live in only one universe. OUR universe!

Theories such as "GOD" are the fiction of the man's mind and are not based on any evidence; logical or empirical; it's not being nasty or disrespectful, it's just the truth.

Science cannot fully comprehend a human or animal brain yet and I doubt they EVER will. Some things, probably by design, are not meant to be understood. That means the sixth sense, part of meta-physics, cannot have a "rational" explanation...hence META-physics and not normal physics!

Agnostic Atheism is the open-minded stance that if God were to be proved then the Atheism would be happily renounced based on the newly found Gnostcisim. But remember, it's 1 thing proving whether "GOD" exists, it's another story trying to prove which religion best fits the God, if at all. Religion is man-made after all, not God made.

edit on 23/2/11 by awake_and_aware because: (no reason given)

Then what exactly is the study of theology? I thought theology encompases all or most of the worlds' religion into gnosis. The study of knowledge!

And since you mentioned the wikipedia definition of evolution, which I accidently deleted and do not feel like re-quoting everything again from scratch, lets just say evolution and creation can co-exist. Something creates humans, animals, plants, algae AND THEN they "evolve" somehow...probably by intelligent manipulation!

reply to post by EarthCitizen07

I am sorry but you cannot have a theory and a fact at the same time.

Its just that some theories are more evolved than others!

You might be sorry but you can have a theory and a fact, Newton's THEORIES are fact.

Evolution is a fact. Of course there is missing data, it's a theory and it's the best theory, and it's processes are shown by conviction of DNA evidence.

COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS REGARDING EVOLUTION:- TOP 10 MYTHS: EVOLUTION

Just do a little bit of listening www.youtube.com...

Your kidding me? A lot of scientists DISAGREE with the multiverse theory and think we live in only one universe. OUR universe!

What are you on about? No i'm not kidding you. Of course a lot of scientists disagree with multiverse. I was merely showing the difference between mathematical metaphysical theory (multiverse) and non-mathematical/philosophical metaphysical theory (omnipotent super-deity)

Science cannot fully comprehend a human or animal brain yet and I doubt they EVER will. Some things, probably by design, are not meant to be understood.

Science makes things understood, it would be unwise to say something is not "meant" to be understood. Science doesn't deal in the unknown, that's the point, it's always at the edge of the known.

Then what exactly is the study of theology? I thought theology encompases all or most of the worlds' religion into gnosis. The study of knowledge!

Knowledge? I see no relativity in the bible? No laws of motion mentioned? No studies of medicines? Computers or binary? I do see poor moral and ethical teaching, morally reprehensible preachings. That's all i see.

I'd sooner find more knowledge in a children's book about the solar system tbh, it's about time humans drop these dogmatic fantasies which are causing so much chaos with our species.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware

You might be sorry but you can have a theory and a fact, Newton's THEORIES are fact.

Till another theory proves the current theory wrong.......

Evolution is a fact. Of course there is missing data, it's a theory and it's the best theory, and it's processes are shown by conviction of DNA evidence.

COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS REGARDING EVOLUTION:- TOP 10 MYTHS: EVOLUTION

No its not a fact! Human bone remains of various cave-dwellers showed up in the middle east as well as modern man artifacts meaning humans did not evolve from cave-dwellers and cave-dwellers did not evolve from the monkey family either.

What are you on about? No i'm not kidding you. Of course a lot of scientists disagree with multiverse. I was merely showing the difference between mathematical metaphysical theory (multiverse) and non-mathematical/philosophical metaphysical theory (omnipotent super-deity)

Ok. Fair enough!

Science makes things understood, it would be unwise to say something is not "meant" to be understood. Science doesn't deal in the unknown, that's the point, it's always at the edge of the known.

I simply think some things are beyond the grasp of human understanding. To understand everything would probably make us omni-potent and if god/angels/demons exist they would not appreciate our expanded knowledge base. Just my opinion!

Knowledge? I see no relativity in the bible? No laws of motion mentioned? No studies of medicines? Computers or binary? I do see poor moral and ethical teaching, morally reprehensible preachings. That's all i see.

I'd sooner find more knowledge in a children's book about the solar system tbh, it's about time humans drop these dogmatic fantasies which are causing so much chaos with our species.

edit on 23/2/11 by awake_and_aware because: (no reason given)

I think the bible has been corrupted beyond repair by pagan satanism early on. It should be no mystery that dozens of books have been banned and/or burned and the protocols of the learned elders of zion, that not only exist, but have not been refuted by the jews either. Also read Deuteronomy!

reply to post by awake_and_aware


I see you prefer insulting people rather than having intelligent discourse. I reported your post and hopefully the mods will take care of things. Way to go man...second time in this thread alone!

reply to post by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by awake_and_aware

You might be sorry but you can have a theory and a fact, Newton's THEORIES are fact.

Till another theory proves the current theory wrong.......

Well, we actually have two theories that have taken the place of Newtonian Mechanics...in certain areas. General and special relativity overrode Newton's calculations for larger bodies and greater speeds, Quantum mechanics managed much smaller realms...

And neither of them actually got rid of the applicability of Newtonian mechanics at smaller scales. Hell, all they did was show that Newton was entirely correct until the introduction of new evidence.

F = ma

F will always equal ma

Evolution is a fact. Of course there is missing data, it's a theory and it's the best theory, and it's processes are shown by conviction of DNA evidence.

COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS REGARDING EVOLUTION:- TOP 10 MYTHS: EVOLUTION

No its not a fact!


Yes, it really is.

Human bone remains of various cave-dwellers showed up in the middle east as well as modern man artifacts meaning humans did not evolve from cave-dwellers and cave-dwellers did not evolve from the monkey family either.

*facepalm*
Humans were cave dwellers. France. Cave paintings. We didn't evolve from cave dwellers, we just moved out of the caves. You do realize that you're just showing your own ignorance, right? None of the evidence you have provided refutes anything claimed in evolutionary theory.

And you do realize that we're still apes, right? Genetically, we're apes. Morphologically, we're apes. Which explains this better, evolution or creationism?

Science makes things understood, it would be unwise to say something is not "meant" to be understood. Science doesn't deal in the unknown, that's the point, it's always at the edge of the known.

I simply think some things are beyond the grasp of human understanding.


Aka "I make things up"

I think the bible has been corrupted beyond repair by pagan satanism early on.

Paganism = polytheism
Satanism = Oppositional Judeo-Christian monotheism.

Paganism predates Abrahamic religion.

It should be no mystery that dozens of books have been banned and/or burned and the protocols of the learned elders of zion, that not only exist, but have not been refuted by the jews either. Also read Deuteronomy!

Hey, look, anti-semitic garbage! You do realize that the Protocols have been refuted, right? Their origin has been traced and the ideas have been objected to. Hell, a Jewish filmmaker even made a documentary about it because he couldn't believe some people actually believed that's what Jews wanted.

I've known Jews. Hell, I sort-of dated one (complicated, long, and painful story). They're mostly good people, just like any other broad group.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
Well, we actually have two theories that have taken the place of Newtonian Mechanics...in certain areas. General and special relativity overrode Newton's calculations for larger bodies and greater speeds, Quantum mechanics managed much smaller realms...

And neither of them actually got rid of the applicability of Newtonian mechanics at smaller scales. Hell, all they did was show that Newton was entirely correct until the introduction of new evidence.

F = ma

F will always equal ma

I am not a scientist but I do know that more-or-less ALL the theories evolve as we develop a better understanding of the universe and our enviroment.

Yes, it really is.

*facepalm*
Humans were cave dwellers. France. Cave paintings. We didn't evolve from cave dwellers, we just moved out of the caves. You do realize that you're just showing your own ignorance, right? None of the evidence you have provided refutes anything claimed in evolutionary theory.

We just moved out of the caves? Do you even know and understand the supposed stages of human evolution? I don't buy that BS at all because nothing can evolve without genetic manipulation of the DNA which involves intelligent guidance/control. Humans of 10,000 bc are not the same humans of 2,000 bc which are also the exact same species of modern man. The old testament and genesis speak of this but I am not sure how much stock we should put into it because like I said almost everything has been corrupted imo.

And you do realize that we're still apes, right? Genetically, we're apes. Morphologically, we're apes. Which explains this better, evolution or creationism?

Wrong! Apes and humans share many similar characteristics but there DNA is slightly different from ours. Just out of curiousity do you realise that BigFoot's DNA is also close to our DNA with slight variations? In fact its more human-like than ape-like.

Aka "I make things up"

No. I don't have an agenda like mainstream science does, so I say it like it is..or at least what I think is true!

Paganism = polytheism
Satanism = Oppositional Judeo-Christian monotheism.

I understand what paganism is and what satanism is. It is you that has a narrow point of view. Yes paganism is/was supposedly polytheism but many pagans did human and animal sacrifices in the name of "the god(s)" which was most likely satan.

Paganism predates Abrahamic religion.

Yes I already knew that! What makes you think I did not? When did I claim the opposite; please point it out to me with a specific quote if you dare. Since paganism predated abrahamic religions it also corrupted abrahamic relgions and that IS the point I have been trying to make all along! While many pagans were polytheists, many were actually satanists because earth is satanic territory. I am not rellying on the bible or any mainstream source for what I say, so obviously my conclusions will seem "off the mark" or "crazy". I like to read alternative material!

Hey, look, anti-semitic garbage! You do realize that the Protocols have been refuted, right? Their origin has been traced and the ideas have been objected to. Hell, a Jewish filmmaker even made a documentary about it because he couldn't believe some people actually believed that's what Jews wanted.

I've known Jews. Hell, I sort-of dated one (complicated, long, and painful story). They're mostly good people, just like any other broad group.

I have nothing against jews, christians or muslims other than all those religions are phoney because they are abrahamic religions! Do you get it now? Nice try painting me "anti-semitic" when I actually go to the anti-zionist bashing threads to support israel and zionism in general.

Do you? Talk is cheap and your beef is primarily against the christians who supposedly "bash" atheism, when in reality they are ten times more hateful towards jews and muslims. Unless you seek alternative media, like me and others do, then you will remain in the twilight zone seeking answers to the wrong questions.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


Cool story bro.

Atheism is more logical than theism I can't claim to verify any positions turth. Nothing more to say.

reply to post by awake_and_aware


Here is a good introduction to what I am talking about:









There are many books written and some of the material is free on the internet............

i dont agree with christians neither do i agree with atheists . becoz both r wrong.
if u search hard enough, u'll find the truth. look at their actions, and u'll see good or evil.
for instance, i hav a friend who is an atheist who tell me he loves his gf, but he goes and # another one when
she's away? and when i tell him, how can u know love if u dont believe in God?

but as we all r one a searc for truth, and the road is not always easy, just like it wont b
easy for christians accept that jesus is infact lucifer / horus / the falling angel / the bright morning star
as he refers to himself in revelations.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Wrong! Apes and humans share many similar characteristics but there DNA is slightly different from ours. Just out of curiousity do you realise that BigFoot's DNA is also close to our DNA with slight variations? In fact its more human-like than ape-like.

How exciting!

When/where was BigFoot captured?
Which team of scientists analysed BigFoot's DNA?
Where can I read the study comparing the DNA of BigFoot with the DNA of humans?

I mean, you wouldn't make a statement like this if it was completely untrue, would you?
What sort of guy would you be if you just pulled nonsensical bullcrap out of your arse?

Madness, I believe that my response to your last post in our "thread within a thread" was lost. Can I revive it to get your feedback? Thanks!

www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by EarthCitizen07


It's a possibility that alien astronauts visited earth and perhaps nurtured us, provided us with the tool of math and agriculture. It's also possible that they didn't.

There's no convincing evidence anywhere on the internet. The book of enoch is entertaining, but i will leave it at that until i have the evidence i require, and the evidence that accomplished historians require.

Thanks for reporting me to the mod bro, much appreciated. Personally, i don't report users, i borrow Jesus's preaching: "turn the other cheek" - Each to his own.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

It's a possibility that alien astronauts visited earth and perhaps nurtured us, provided us with the tool of math and agriculture. It's also possible that they didn't.

There's no convincing evidence anywhere on the internet. The book of enoch is entertaining, but i will leave it at that until i have the evidence i require, and the evidence that accomplished historians require.

Thanks for reporting me to the mod bro, much appreciated. Personally, i don't report users, i borrow Jesus's preaching: "turn the other cheek" - Each to his own.

I guess if I was on YouTube my response would be different to you, but since ATS is an over-moderated site compared to GodLikeProductions and other *anything else goes sites* I would rather not get banned trading insult for insult. As for turning the other cheek and getting slapped again thats kind of foolish considering the fact YOU insulted me for the SECOND time in this thread alone, so your arguement is null and void at face value. Perhaps YOU should practice what you preach?

As for the evidence available I find it pretty damm convincing for anyone that bothers to look at it. I gave you four videos and by no means is that the only evidence available. You expect people to do the work for you and then turn around and say "what accomplished historians require" while totally ignoring the fact that most of our history and science is actually fiction. People on ATS(which is an alternative site by definition) should know better imho!

Originally posted by Kailassa

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Wrong! Apes and humans share many similar characteristics but there DNA is slightly different from ours. Just out of curiousity do you realise that BigFoot's DNA is also close to our DNA with slight variations? In fact its more human-like than ape-like.

How exciting!

When/where was BigFoot captured?
Which team of scientists analysed BigFoot's DNA?
Where can I read the study comparing the DNA of BigFoot with the DNA of humans?

I mean, you wouldn't make a statement like this if it was completely untrue, would you?
What sort of guy would you be if you just pulled nonsensical bullcrap out of your arse?

There have been a few documentaries on tv that discuss both bigfoot and the chupacabra with various studies being carried out on them and different "opinions" handed out. Either you have not watched those documentaries or you don't trust the studies.

Fine I don't really care what you think but "pulling nonsensical crap out of my arse" is not only ignorant of you but quite rude as well. Get a grip on your emotions!

Is this still going...

Don't you see it.

It hangs on your own experience of it.

Originally posted by Deebo
I am guessing for the same reason there are many threads attacking Christians, Muslims, etc.. Imho, religion (or lack there of) is a/the main cause of conflict and war.. As you see.


Deebo

What are examples of "lack of religion" being the main cause of war?

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
There have been a few documentaries on tv that discuss both bigfoot and the chupacabra with various studies being carried out on them and different "opinions" handed out. Either you have not watched those documentaries or you don't trust the studies.

So you cannot quote a single study to support your claim that:

BigFoot's DNA is also close to our DNA with slight variations? In fact its more human-like than ape-like.

?

Fine I don't really care what you think but "pulling nonsensical crap out of my arse" is not only ignorant of you but quite rude as well. Get a grip on your emotions!

You misunderstand me.
It was not me pulling nonsensical crap out of your arse.
In fact, you didn't seem to need anyone's help in that regard.

reply to post by awake_and_aware


Actually no it isn't. Both commit the argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacy. Thusly neither is more logical.