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.
Originally posted by borntowatch
Its a mortal atheist sin to question evolution, to deny you understand it is to deny faith in science Darwin and Dawkins.
Burn atheist heretic, burn.
Well you know its a joke I hope.
As easy as maths, 0+0= everything and then life.
If they could explain the answer so that I could understand it, I would accept evolution, as I would expect every Christian to do. To deny we dont understand evolution to the atheist is to invite ridicule and hate. One would think it was an opportunity to invite a logical methodical explanation, but that doesnt exist so ridicule and hate will have to do.
If I was an atheist it would be easier to lie and agree
Originally posted by jiggerj
reply to post by HappyBunny
If you wouldn't do this at home
My last response to you.
Originally posted by borntowatch
Its a mortal atheist sin to question evolution, to deny you understand it is to deny faith in science Darwin and Dawkins.
Burn atheist heretic, burn.
Well you know its a joke I hope.
As easy as maths, 0+0= everything and then life.
If they could explain the answer so that I could understand it, I would accept evolution, as I would expect every Christian to do. To deny we dont understand evolution to the atheist is to invite ridicule and hate. One would think it was an opportunity to invite a logical methodical explanation, but that doesnt exist so ridicule and hate will have to do.
If I was an atheist it would be easier to lie and agree
Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
reply to post by MrXYZ
Yup it's easier for all the parts from a F-22 fighter to just fall together with no designer & no assembly team.
And then fly itself, after building itself with no intelligence, and no reason. Yup makes total sense
Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
reply to post by HappyBunny
According to Hoyle's analysis, the probability of cellular life evolving was about one-in-10 *40000.
Those are some nice math odds, that's a nasty bet. But then it's not money that we are talking about, it's life.
Life as we know it is, among other things, dependent on at least 2000 different enzymes. How could the blind forces of the primal sea manage to put together the correct chemical elements to build enzymes?
Is there a way to estimate the number of technologically advanced civilizations that might exist in our Galaxy? While working at the National Radio Astronomy Observatory in Green Bank, West Virginia, Dr. Frank Drake conceived a means to mathematically estimate the number of worlds that might harbor beings with technology sufficient to communicate across the vast gulfs of interstellar space. The Drake Equation, as it came to be known, was formulated in 1961 and is generally accepted by the scientific community.
Frank Drake's own current solution to the Drake Equation estimates 10,000 communicative civilizations in the Milky Way. Dr. Drake, who serves on the SETI League's advisory board, has personally endorsed SETI's planned all-sky survey
Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
reply to post by MrXYZ
Yup it's easier for all the parts from a F-22 fighter to just fall together with no designer & no assembly team.
And then fly itself, after building itself with no intelligence, and no reason. Yup makes total sense
100 old mind that is using 1/10 of 1 percent of it's ability
So after using that argumentative fallacy...you simply use it again and expect people not to laugh?
Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
reply to post by MrXYZ
So after using that argumentative fallacy...you simply use it again and expect people not to laugh?
Do your really think I am using it to try to convince you ?
No this is for the lurkers, especially people with logical minds, not you, your mind is solidly made up, so it has nothing to do with the quality of the debate, that's irrelevant.
Originally posted by MrXYZ
Originally posted by borntowatch
Its a mortal atheist sin to question evolution, to deny you understand it is to deny faith in science Darwin and Dawkins.
Burn atheist heretic, burn.
Well you know its a joke I hope.
As easy as maths, 0+0= everything and then life.
If they could explain the answer so that I could understand it, I would accept evolution, as I would expect every Christian to do. To deny we dont understand evolution to the atheist is to invite ridicule and hate. One would think it was an opportunity to invite a logical methodical explanation, but that doesnt exist so ridicule and hate will have to do.
If I was an atheist it would be easier to lie and agree
So basically you don't believe the theory because it hasn't been dumbed down enough
Originally posted by HappyBunny
The problem is that "logical methodical explanation" isn't in the creationist's lexicon. I don't know how much more dumbed down you want it. If you don't understand it the way it's written, then educate yourself until you do. That's what critical thinkers do. They can admit that they don't know or understand something...and then they read everything they can, or ask people, until the DO understand it.
Originally posted by borntowatch
You are hacking and slashing every atheist on earth who cant explain evolution, not just Christians.
You would eat (metaphorically) your own children to justify your faith.
Do you believe evolution is 100% fact? No doubts at all? That is faith.
I mean why even study evolution ifits so true, why does anyone care if the evidence is so solid.
Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
reply to post by MrXYZ
So after using that argumentative fallacy...you simply use it again and expect people not to laugh?
Do your really think I am using it to try to convince you ?
No this is for the lurkers, especially people with logical minds, not you, your mind is solidly made up, so it has nothing to do with the quality of the debate, that's irrelevant.
Originally posted by Barcs
Originally posted by borntowatch
You are hacking and slashing every atheist on earth who cant explain evolution, not just Christians.
You would eat (metaphorically) your own children to justify your faith.
Do you believe evolution is 100% fact? No doubts at all? That is faith.
I mean why even study evolution ifits so true, why does anyone care if the evidence is so solid.
What faith is involved when agreeing with repeatable testable evidence and experiments? Do you need faith to believe the sky is blue? 100% fact? No doubts at all? That is faith! The sun revolves around the sun in 365 days. It really takes a LOT of faith to believe that one, even though we can measure and record the exact time it takes. You believe it 100%??? Gotta be faith. This dude kills me. I'm posting this and I don't even have power at my house it's just so worth it!
edit on 2-11-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
reply to post by solomons path
It's the Drake Equation verses the Fermi Paradox then....guess which one I side with ?
For every argument there is a philosophical counterpoint, of course evolutionists and atheists will support what conforms to their world view. And theists will support what conforms to their world view.
I have had experience with supernatural support after intense prayer, he doesn't answer every prayer instantly and unfortunately, as I found out, he is very selective. But one experience is enough to confirm it, it was just too quick, like seconds.
Thus I know he created the cosmos and the biological entities on the planet.
And the math supports this.
People are in denial on this, to deny accountability & justify (in their less than 100 old mind that is using 1/10 of 1 percent of it's ability yet they think they understand so much) the mess world is in, they actually think they know better than God. Does a 1 year old know better than a 50 year old ?