Solar - Flying Spaghetti Monster sounds reasonable enough? :>
Christians are basically this.i agree to this^
(http://scottklarr.com/media/atheism/motivationalPosters/atheism_motivational_poster_4.jpg)
And when you think about it...
(http://scottklarr.com/media/atheism/motivationalPosters/atheism_motivational_poster_18.jpg)
So, I prefer the science way.
(http://www.nioutaik.fr/images/dossier28/crea8.jpg)
So bad the science was slowed down by christianity...
(http://scottklarr.com/media/atheism/motivationalPosters/atheism_motivational_poster_20.jpg)
God is as real as the tooth fairy.
Anyone that doesn't agree with that
Diamond Head is as good as Metallica
Anyone that doesn't agree with that
Believe in church? Yes, I believe in the existence of churches. You should re-word your poll :>
Christians are basically this.
(http://scottklarr.com/media/atheism/motivationalPosters/atheism_motivational_poster_4.jpg)
Come on man the picture u put up is called atheism motivational poster ... lmfao...
First of all i think its wrong, my father is a atheist.... ... hes not happy with anything in life...
i belive iin evolution not in adam and eve that ate apples from trees, any logical thing in life nobody can prove me wrong.. but having no faith in anything? thinking that life just came out of nothing... u must be a fuckin retard to think that.... Science came very far but theres one point that every scientist comes to and those questions he cant asnerw...
they sometimes turn crazy... or very religious... some things u cannot anserw and just that part logicly tells you that there is something,... maybe hes not in the sky wating for us to die, but its in us, karma,,, in nature and in life it self.. maybe i just smoked a lil bit too much now and this is a touchy subject... so i will leave it as it is... but belive me son you are very wrong.
(http://anonymouslefty.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/captain-obvious.jpg)
Huh, OK... I know christians very sad in their life, and atheists very happy... I don't think happiness in your life have anything to do with religion.
And what? Explaining why a fire burn or why an apple fall was an unanswerable question few hundreds years past. Doesn't mean it can't be answered. And you made me laugh. "life just came out of nothing". And from where come your god? Why a cosmic super puissance coming from nowhere who created an universe is more logical than the universe coming from nowhere?
I smoked too and I don't think I am wrong. Religion is what many people need to don't see the truth : you are nothing, you are here for no reason, you will die for no reason, and once you're dead, there is nothing. Of course most people are afraid of this. It's why they need god.
Because I can't answer a question, doesn't mean it is logical to suppose the Flying Spaghetti Monster did it.
(http://www.nioutaik.fr/images/dossier28/crea8.jpg)Modern Christianity is nothing like this.
(http://scottklarr.com/media/atheism/motivationalPosters/atheism_motivational_poster_20.jpg)
There was many cleric–scientists who contributed greatly to the science. A name like Copernicus, does it ring a bell? I will leave you with a homework - find the other. Being atheist doesn't mean you are automatically smart. And it doesn't mean that you can't be fanatical when arguing with others.
I don't give a damn what you believe or disbelieve in :)
People who praise reason should do better than pasting some stupid demotivators that have nothing to do with reality. An image suggesting that there was nothing going on for 1000 years is simply false. Besides, most scholars in medieval period were clergymen, especially early on and actually they were the ones who saved a lot of Greek works. "Dark ages" is just a propaganda term, no serious historian use it anymore (at least not in such negative context).
There was many cleric–scientists who contributed greatly to the science. A name like Copernicus, does it ring a bell? I will leave you with a homework - find the other. Being atheist doesn't mean you are automatically smart. And it doesn't mean that you can't be fanatical when arguing with others.
I'm agnostic and I don't give a damn what you believe or disbelieve in :)
Galileo's championing of Copernicanism was controversial within his lifetime, when a large majority of philosophers and astronomers still subscribed to the geocentric view that the Earth is at the centre of the universe. After 1610, when he began publicly supporting the heliocentric view, which placed the Sun at the centre of the universe, he met with bitter opposition from some philosophers and clerics, and two of the latter eventually denounced him to the Roman Inquisition early in 1615. In February 1616, although he had been cleared of any offence, the Catholic Church nevertheless condemned heliocentrism as "false and contrary to Scripture",[10] and Galileo was warned to abandon his support for it—which he promised to do. When he later defended his views in his most famous work, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, published in 1632, he was tried by the Inquisition, found "vehemently suspect of heresy", forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest
There was many cleric–scientists who contributed greatly to the science.
So, I prefer the science way.
(Science vs. Faith picture)
but any system which promotes "belief" over evidence has a negative effect on human progress.
It is not a problem with beliefs in god. It's a problem with a system based on monopoly of violence (government), where people in power can tell you what you can or cannot do, or you will be shot or thrown into a jail. For example, if you think stem cell research is unethical, you shouldn't be forced to pay for the research (which many christians may be, via taxes).
Science's great ability is that it accepts the possibility even the most fundamental part of it could be completely wrong and changes based upon something being proven to be better. That's how progress is made.
any system which promotes "belief" over evidence has a negative effect on human progress.Indeed, I fully agree. But as I said, we don't promote belief over evidence anymore.
1) Hundreds of years before Jesus, according to the Mithraic religion, three Wise Men of Persia came to visit the baby savior-god Mithra, bring him gifts of gold, myrrh and frankincense.
2) Mithra was born on December 25 as told in the “Great Religions of the World”, page 330; “…it was the winter solstice celebrated by ancients as the birthday of Mithraism’s sun god”.
3) According to Mithraism, before Mithra died on a cross, he celebrated a “Last Supper with his twelve disciples, who represented the twelve signs of the zodiac.
4) After the death of Mithra, his body was laid to rest in a rock tomb.
5) Mithra had a celibate priesthood.
6) Mithra ascended into heaven during the spring (Passover) equinox (the time when the sun crosses the equator making night and day of equal length).
As you can now see, Christianity derived many of its essential elements from the ancient religion of Mithraism. Mithraism became intertwined with the cult of Jesus to form what is known today as “Christianity.” Although literary sources on this religion are sparse, an abundance of material evidence exists in the many Mithraic temples and artifacts that archaeologists have found scattered throughout the Roman Empire, from England in the north and west to Palestine in the south and east. The temples were usually built underground in caves, which are filled with an extremely elaborate iconography (illustrating by pictures, figures and images). There were many hundreds of Mithraic temples in the Roman Empire, the greatest concentrations have been found in the city of Rome itself.
There are tens of accounts of pagan gods of many different cultures who were said to have the same attributes as those that Christians claim Jesus had.
Trinity―Trinities were popular in pagan sects before Christianity was introduced to the world. Some of the more well known trinity gods included Mithra-Vohu Mana-Rashnu, Amen-Mut-Khonsu, and Osiris-Isis-Horus.
Virgin Birth―Among the pagan cultures that preceded Christianity, virgin birth stories abounded. The long list of pagan gods born of virgins includes: Romulus and Remus, Zoroaster, Buddha, Mithras, Chrishna, Osiris-Aion, Agdistis, Attis, Tammuz, Adonis, Korybas, Perseus, and Dionysus.
Disciples―In the following 'saviors' cases, a grouping of disciples was present, just as they were present in Jesus' story: Horus, Buddha, Chrishna, Dionysus, Mithra. Interestingly enough, in the case of Dionysus, his disciple Acoetes was a boatman, just as Jesus' disciple Peter. And just as Peter was freed from jail when the doors miraculously flew open, so was Dionysus' disciple Acoetes. In Budda's case, he, like Jesus, demanded that his disciples renounce all worldly possessions. Yet another instance of similarity is that the disciples of both Jesus and Buddha were said to have been arrested for preaching, as well as witnessed to have "walked on water."
Miracles―Among those 'saviors' who, like Jesus, performed countless miracles include: Horus, Chrishna, Buddha, Dionysus, Mithra, Osirus, and Adonis. Horus was said to have walked on water, just as Jesus did. In addition, Horus raised one man, El-Azarus, from the dead in front of countless witnesses. In the case of Buddha, it was told that he fed five hundred men with one loaf of bread, that he cured lepers, and that he caused the blind to see. Dionysus rescued a person from dying when the person was utterly desolate and placed them among the stars. And he gave food and drink, herbs and berries, to the starving people -- not to mention turning water into wine.
The Sun―Here is another common theory, quoted from S. Acharya's "The Origins of Christianity and the Quest for the Historical Jesus:" "The reason why all these pagan narratives are so similar to a "god-man" is that these stories were based on the movements of the sun through the heavens, an astrotheological development that can be found throughout the planet because the sun and the 12 zodiac signs can be observed around the globe.
God exist as much as Santa Clauss ;)
I go to church when I want and need to go there. I believe in God but sometimes I thinking about him. We don't know what is after dead - maybe nothing but maybe there is something special...
6 10 10 1 6 6 ?? ? ? ? ? ? ?
At the pool there should be.Forced by parents to go at church cuz many christian parents force children to go at church.
In 2001 only 32.2% out of ~10 mil. Czechs said to believe in some kind of a God or divinity and numbers of believers are still falling since that time. They say that Czech Republic will be the first country where religion will die.
I'm proud to call myself Czech.
1. why there is an earth?1) Mars, Moon... hope that someday something far away of our solar system, staying on one place so long is something like sending message about my position via radio and waiting for PK.
Conclusion: The earth is the only place we will ever be, no Hell or Heaven
2. where have we went?
Conclusion: Mother nature is here to help us make our life artificial, so the are going nowhere.
3. what can we do?
So the reason for life is to uncover individual IMORTALITY
I HAD FOUD THE REASON OF LIVEHumans are predators in nature and parasites of nature, if you're not exploiting our planet and using others, then you lost your reason to live, because you can't go against your nature. If you "found" something else, then you're going in wrong way and only think that you found some kind of reason to live.
You are still an animal, "thinking" can't move you anywhere else.Heh, if that's what you think you are. I like to think of myself being something more than just instinct-driven animal.
you are more likely to destroy nature to survive.Why? No.
And thats not what I think I am. Thats reality, truth. You are instinct-driven animal. It has been proven already.And I don't think I am an instinct-driven animal. It's not true for me. It can't be proven. It's just a matter of opinion.
It can be proven quite easilly.I don't believe it. It's a philosophical matter. Philosophers were arguing about it for centuries, and you say you can prove it easly? No, not really.
LagMaster: you are joking, right?as i told before, is hard to understand if i tell it str8, but i need to tell you all my philosophy
I don't believe it. It's a philosophical matter. Philosophers were arguing about it for centuries, and you say you can prove it easly? No, not really.No, It is scientifical matter, like nearly everything. I can describe quite nice test, that have proven this. But would it matter? Would you believe in that?
It is not beyond our understanding. It is fake. We have found no evidence for existence of soul, on the other side, we have quite a lot of evidence against it.Evidence against existence of soul? Seriously WTH? Don't get me wrong, I personaly don't believe in some kind of spirit that leaves our dead body after we die. But seriously there is no way to prove it is not like that.
imageIt seems to me that many people mistake religion with faith, but those are 2 different things. Faith is something people believe in, something that gives them hope (it doesn't necesserily have to be a faith in god) and it doesn't have to go against science. Religion is set of rules that tells you how to live and what's good what's bad, the main flaw of the religion is that it can and it is heavily used just as tool to gain power, and this way it usually slows down progress. (So there should be written Religion in that picture :) )
Mayack: yes, there are plenty of them, thermodynamic law eg.
You modern theories are quite consistent, IF there would be ghost, it would have to react with body somehow etc. it would mean mutch more new things, and that our contenporary knowledge is wrong. It could be, but because quite consistency in our theories and no strong prove that they are wrong (eg. no evidence for ghost etc.), this is evidence against ghost. Theory with spirits should explain our conteporary knowledge consistently with new spirits evidence. But hypothesis with spirits don't do that, they try to explain only spirits and try to relativize all our knowledge. Because no real scientist even think of them.
Eh, if all that was in reference to a soul you should be careful about what language you use, a ghost and a soul are not necessarily interchangeable, also this is the same shit as "God exists", "No he doesn't there is no evidence to prove it", "There's no evidence to disprove it though!"Yeah, wrote about spirit and ghost have possesed my hands... but thats not important.
medieval notions like "souls".Now you are accusing Christians of being "medieval". Let me accuse you of ignorance.
God defined by bible was disproven.Nope.
"God exists", "No he doesn't there is no evidence to prove it", "There's no evidence to disprove it though!""God doesn't exist", "There is no evidence to prove it, God does exist", "There's no evidence to disprove that he doesn't though!"
Now you are accusing Christians of being "medieval". Let me accuse you of ignorance.
BTW. Actually, we could tell there is a proof that God exists. Because, since the universe is there, existing, moving on, it's logical for me there somewhere is that unknown force which started it all. Now I just need to keep looking for it(Him?). Find your own God, if Christianity is so wrong for you
Let's agree on pre-renaissance then, if that makes you happy. Those dark dark days before Scientific Method.
Yes! Fantastic logic! Nothing can exist without something being there first ... so there must be God ... who existed before ... wait, what?
I know, there must have been a Super-God who created God. But wait - who created Super-God? Mega-God? Ultra-God?
I know, there must have been a Super-God who created God. But wait - who created Super-God? Mega-God? Ultra-God?I believe God is the Almighty One, there is nothing more powerful than Him. If you want to believe in Super-God or something else, then do. My faith is (fine) as it is.
And for example there is a scientific explanation why that lake in the bible book turned red, as bloodYou can explain basicly every major miracle that occured back then - lake turning red, the sea being wide open etc.
Yes! Fantastic logic! Nothing can exist without something being there first ... so there must be God ... who existed before ... wait, what?From a religious view point or a scientific view point, it doens't make any sense.
I know, there must have been a Super-God who created God. But wait - who created Super-God? Mega-God? Ultra-God?
I believe God is the Almighty One, there is nothing more powerful than Him. If you want to believe in Super-God or something else, then do. My faith is (fine) as it is.Still God needs someone to pay to keep our world running, or else it'll be closed. He gaining donations from humans, may be he can even do that with flames, trolling and whining! Depends on whom he pays.
From a religious view point or a scientific view point, it doens't make any sense.
I mean, no matter how you look at it:
- If we both agree Big Bang is true, then what caused Big Bang? What created the matter to let whatever caused the Big Bang happen?
- And then what you said, about what created god. What created God? If a person says "God has been around for all time", then what created 4th Dimension? etc, etc.
Doesn't make sense either way - an infinite cycle, really.
magic man in the sky creating everything we knowI don't perceive Him that way. I'd rather say He is everywhere, flowing through the universe, through us.
I'd rather say He is everywhere, flowing through the universe, through us.
Christians' beliefs don't collide with science. Actually, these two are pretty much filling eachother up.
I don't perceive Him that way. I'd rather say He is everywhere, flowing through the universe, through us.
Try to first understand the concept of God, then argue.
Also, you keep using Science as an argument. To develop something, a man first had to come up with an idea. Then he proves others that it's correct.
If you can't reach out for Him, think of Him as an idea that wasn't yet proven nor disproven. Just like Science, huh?
Some day you're gonna step on evidences. The thing you do wrong is assuming in advance that He doesn't exist
You are criticising it, but you're acting exactly the same way.
Total nonsense.Yes, you're right in the sense that Scientific theories come a lot closer to "the beginning" than any religion does.
"snip"
The beauty of Science is that it isn't a closed book that claims to have the answers, it says "This is our best understanding of our reality, use evidence to prove it wrong". The exact opposite of religion which says "This is exactly what happened, please ignore the fact we've got absolutely nothing to back this up".
At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst.
Is God able to create object so heavy that he won't be able to lift it?
- If yes, then he is not almighty.
- If no, then he is not omnipotent.
Simply my point is that only thing that differs us from animals right now is a fear of punishment.
Simply we would get back to natural selection that mankind seems to avoid quiet successfully these days (which is imho the main source of our doom=overpopulation). We've reached such absurd point that even those who don't want to be anymore (now I mean f.e. extreme cases of paralysis, when man becomes trapped inside his body and absolutely dependent on others) are kept alive no matter what.
We consider our lives as something precious, something more, yet we slaughter endless numbers of animals every day with no remorse - arguing, that they are just mindless animals with no souls. But we were at the exactly same point in our evolution as they are now in theirs.
At the point that we were HOMO-something we were literary just another animals on the surface of the planet. So by this logic if some more intelligent race came back then and started to breed us for meat, skin or labor, then it would have been ok right? We were just mindless animals with no souls therefore the life of the member of that "upper" race is worth more than life of the animal(=man).
And I agree with someone who mentioned it before, that man is just another animal driven by instincts. No matter how high our IQ may go, no matter how noble we may get, no matter whenever we have souls or not, we are just animals as any other.Yes, but we ourselves created this "fear of punishment" or "system of rules". Animals can't grasp that. If something were to go wrong like a nuclear war or something, and human advancement is pushed back, it is still in our nature to progress and form societies.
Just search for another topic here in offtop section, it was something like "what would you do if the world is about to end". And I would say majority of people there let their "inner beast" out and wrote down the truth or at least part of it. Simply my point is that only thing that differs us from animals right now is a fear of punishment. Remove that from equation and you will be amazed what would our precious little society here on Earth turned out to be. Only strong will survive. Also with our numerous gadgets it would be a little more complex than fistfights but strong does not discriminate between muscles or mind. Simply we would get back to natural selection that mankind seems to avoid quiet successfully these days (which is imho the main source of our doom=overpopulation). We've reached such absurd point that even those who don't want to be anymore (now I mean f.e. extreme cases of paralysis, when man becomes trapped inside his body and absolutely dependent on others) are kept alive no matter what.
We only differ from the rest of the animal kingdom in our rational way of think.You did not get me. My point is that most of us, no matter how noble mankind could be, would not hesitate when it comes to "natural selection scenario". Those who would hesitate => would be weak => would have to pass the right to live to stronger ones.
We STILL are Homos, Homo-Sapiens. And the reason why Cromagnon prevails over Neanderthal is SOCIABILTY, the Cromagnon used to hunt in groups, use dogs to help the job. They used to save their supplies too, meanwhile Neanderthals were living the present, without expecting the possible lack of food in the future. This despite Neanderthals more big craneal capacity, ignoring the surface of his brain, being compared to the one of the Cromagnon.I know that we are Homo sapiens, but again you did not get it. I meant that by our own logic if we could timetravel and bring back our prehistoric ancestors and then as said breed them for meat/skin/labor, then it should be completely ok with everyone (except vegetarians/vegans). Because where is the crime? Its just an animal, so what? What difference does it make whenever it is sociable or not? Killer-whales are capable of sociability, such as many other animals. Yet do you see us trying to save every single one of them even those crippled ones? Does whole families dedicate their lives to feed crippled animals, that won't be able to live on their own ever again?
We only differ from the rest of the animal kingdom in our rational way of think.Which will ultimately be not just ours but their doom too.
Yes, but we ourselves created this "fear of punishment" or "system of rules". Animals can't grasp that. If something were to go wrong like a nuclear war or something, and human advancement is pushed back, it is still in our nature to progress and form societies.Just because one species happened to choose the right time between meteor showers and had good conditions to develop uninterrupted does not make them superior to others. Where could dolphins be in a quadrizilion years from now? They could rule the galaxy as far as I'm concerned.
Was the big bang a collision of branes along the 11th dimension? Are we holographic projections from the edge of the universe? Does a photon travel along EVERY path avaialble to it until its observed, at which point the history of that photon is decided and the history of the universe changes (Which can mean you can effect things which happened 13 billion years ago)
There are tests being done on fundamental beliefs? People are willing to accept that God does not exist until there is evidence found for him? No.Didn't I mention experiencing God in your life already? Someone who did, doesn't need more proofs. He is gonna believe. You're not gonna "touch" Him if you don't try. You won't understand.
Religion is completely illogical, it does not accept tests and does not accept the fact it may be total nonsense. The are in no way complimentary.Religion being total nonsense isn't a fact. It's a statement you, eniemies of religion created. And going to stand by it.
Religion is a lot more closely linked to a fantasy novel.
Correct. He is a hypothesis. There is just no evidence to back it up after much searching, so its a failed hypothesis.Again: it's personal.
Haha, let's get passed 2012 and the end of the Mayan calander. One crack pot theory at a time please.And who mentioned that? The only Christians who claim they know when the world is ended are the so called "Jehovah's Witnesses"(if that's how you call them in english). But nowhere in Bible is there a clear date given.
All just a matter of proof.Indeed. Proof you have to search for if you want to find it :)
You did not get me. My point is that most of us, no matter how noble mankind could be, would not hesitate when it comes to "natural selection scenario".I get what you said but, what that have to do with this? Obviously If we are a sane animal, wouldn't hesitate. No?
Those who would hesitate => would be weak => would have to pass the right to live to stronger ones.I understand your point of view. What are you trying to inculcate with that? Why If we choose the one of our own selection, are we being weak? Living for the stronger? I think not.
I know that we are Homo sapiens, but again you did not get it. I meant that by our own logic if we could timetravel and bring back our prehistoric ancestors and then as said breed them for meat/skin/labor, then it should be completely ok with everyone (except vegetarians/vegans).No exceptions, I doubt in the past when humans used to hunt more for survival have been vegetarians, when they ate basically meat. Agriculture happens later (Sedentary), when earlier was the hunting, but also harvesting berries (Omnivore).
Because where is the crime? Its just an animal, so what? What difference does it make whenever it is sociable or not? Killer-whales are capable of sociability, such as many other animals. Yet do you see us trying to save every single one of them even those crippled ones? Does whole families dedicate their lives to feed crippled animals, that won't be able to live on their own ever again?Then you are writting about what we are or could be. Killer whales kill because of food, same as we, If there were nothing more else to do. I do not know about the life of a whale to answer If they feed crippled who are going to die, or are being left for dead.
Through seeing ourselves as something more, something with soul, something created by god to his own image we have set out a journey on deadly path.The term god has been created by Hominids, old prophets of Asia Minor invented for a purpose added, product of their creativity, power and the use of it over the other populations, who respected them and believe every single word coming out of: their mouths/manuscripts, and using that power and respect to take advantage and restrict their actions, now working as laws. Meanwhile they were giving answer to people of why they exists (but prophets can't), so they invented god as the creative force. There you have the dual-task conducted so well.
Which will ultimately be not just ours but their doom too.
We are not only one with creativity.But we have more creativity than other animals. There has never been said other animals weren't creative at a certain point.
We are not only one with rational thinking.As well as hominids act very irrational at times. But this is based most in the fact we can restrain before perform something, thinking about benefits and consequences. It's about the level that fact holds.
We are the only one that make those important things (antropic princip)I don't know about that principle, If you could explain more about the correlation between it and the thread, would be great.
About evolution, evolution is more about "survival of the luckiest" so only antropic princip gives good answer for "why we are here?"
But we have more creativity than other animals. There has never been said other animals weren't creative at a certain point.Yeah, and horse have bigger penis. Does it mean that horse is better than human? That it is not animal? Creativity is only important for humans.
As well as hominids act very irrational at times. But this is based most in the fact we can restrain before perform something, thinking about benefits and consequences. It's about the level that fact holds.Even when you think you behave rationale, in most times you only rationalize what you subconsciousness ordered to do.
I don't know about that principle, If you could explain more about the correlation between it and the thread, would be great.It is quite simple.
People rely on god too much. So much they can't help themselves anymore.Man, what people did you meet ;o
Colombo how is creativity only important for humans? We evolved faster thus it is currently important for us but other species will get there (if we don't destroy them)Blablabla.
http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2010/04/clever-crows-complex-cognition.html
Give it a couple of million years and it's "creativity" or "intelligence" will be a great asset to that particular species of birds.
Man, what people did you meet ;oBasically anyone I knew in the place where I lived in the old country. People there were all religious and all not working. They thought they were too good to get the jobs that were available. I know these jobs were not going to provide them a lot of money, but still enough to live. People had ideas to run businesses of their own, but they didn't because they were too scared to dare for a chance of success or failure. They resorted to prayer, blind god/pope worship, unemployment welfare, business indevelopment phobia and a 24/7 couch-sitting routine, except when they go to church to beg god for a golden shower. Economy began to cripple, people wouldn't buy things because everything looked too expensive for them. The streets began to be dangerous, I've seen people get robbed over a dime's worth, such good christians they are they think they're too good to obey the 7th commandment.
That's pretty bad then. No doubt you are negative towards Christians now. But let me tell you - you knew the wrong ones.all the religions are wrong, i mean if every religion tells tehy are the moast truthfull and the moast close to God, than they are all false
Your faith system regarding how science works sounds as blind as religion to be honest.Explain how I define axioms and live by them. The only "faith" or believe I have is, that the world is knowable, not absolutely knowable, but knowable.
Yeah, I cannot be 100% sure
I just don't know why I write it. I should probably delete it, but I wanna to fight this battle against ignorance.
That's pretty much like religion.????????? Thats total oposite of religion. Ok, my english is not the brightest, but there is difference between "can" and "cannot"
Just let it go there is some who never experienced nothing in theri life,Thats ad hominum
no spirutual wierd stuff, no halucinations and showings of any kind.... some poeple will just never feel it or see it...Thats wrong. And what changed chemical state of brain have to do with uderstanding of religion or science?
and by my thinking they will die blind....Thats only your opinion. You can go back to jungle, sniff koka there and die "enlightened", do not use computer, it is product of science and it makes you blind!
of course u do not die and go to heaven and fuck 30 virgins...Of course your faith is more real than any other fait.
but im sure there is something wierd something u will never be able to explain not ur stupid fuckin science and not ur stupid religions.......And what do you do there isn't religion? Completly.
but some people thinking they are smart and trying to prove we are the only ones in the galaxyWho? Only those who believe in creation do think of that. Or many weird people.
or there is no such thing as a god or love or ghostly fucked up shit..... u are retartedAnd thats why?
if u think so.... i personally had plenty of encouters with crazy shit in my life time, i lived all around the world and met alot of people...And thats important why?
some people were crazy but some people were smart and crazy. I remeber meeting a guy in jail he told me his whole life story and a story about his sister who was calling ghosts as a kid with her freinds on the graveyard trying to be cool satanist's or atheist dumb fucks who made fun of it.... there was 3 girls 1 killed her self 5 days after the other one is still in a metnal institue and the third is a vegetable and dosent talk to anybody.... this guy was around 50 years old, he was convicted of assualt times 2 casuing bodly harm he broke a guys nose he smashed him so hard the piece of the bone went up to the guys brain... the guy was in hells angels, he didnt belive in god but he sure hell was scared when he was talkinga bout that.....And thats important why?
one day u primitive fucks will learn i hope not the hard way... but some of u will never learn and will live a lie... either going to church praying for nothing or just not beliving in shit and proving everybody wrong with science, which of course in my opinion is a bunch of bullshit u cannot prove anything of this topic with science....So you know that thruth and don't live in lie? And you know it, because some old man waiting for capital punishment in prison told you?
One of the few occassions where I agree with you on.That post in a nutshell:
I see what you mean, but... too aggresive, man.I don't. Can you explain it to me? From my point, he just say that I can't understand it, because ???, that there is something higher, because ???, that science is shit because he dont understand hit (his whole point about "be accident" is flawed)
I don't. Can you explain it to me? From my point, he just say that I can't understand it, because ???, that there is something higher, because ???, that science is shit because he dont understand hit (his whole point about "be accident" is flawed)
For a start, writing in proper english so you don't look like a complete idiot might help you for getting other people to take you serious.
Second, you accuse other people being "simple minded fucks" , but never really come up with actual arguments, except "lol u r wrong, because I say so.". If you want to keep on entertaining the people with posts like these, go on, though.
and still try to prove something with scinece and smart anserws buddy i wish i could see u on the streets once...That only reflect how stupid you are. What I write is not rhetoric of some kind, not from position of power, how you write. But from position of thinking. When you define "soul" and define "god", like bible or etc. and you could test it with science, you would get no results, something is wrong. Method of testing, science, or you hypothesis. This is not "smart asnwer", this is simple core of science. If you don't understand, you can't argue against it. You experience is nice, but you are arguing only that "you have experiences", not telling me which one. You are telling me, that you experienced those in "real life", but why is your life more real than mine?
*post*
Basically anyone I knew in the place where I lived in the old country. People there were all religious and all not working. They thought they were too good to get the jobs that were available. I know these jobs were not going to provide them a lot of money, but still enough to live. People had ideas to run businesses of their own, but they didn't because they were too scared to dare for a chance of success or failure. They resorted to prayer, blind god/pope worship, unemployment welfare, business indevelopment phobia and a 24/7 couch-sitting routine, except when they go to church to beg god for a golden shower. Economy began to cripple, people wouldn't buy things because everything looked too expensive for them. The streets began to be dangerous, I've seen people get robbed over a dime's worth, such good christians they are they think they're too good to obey the 7th commandment.
I on the other hand managed to escape.
P.S. I'm talking about this sort of golden shower.
(http://www.sportaphile.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/scrooge-mcduck-make-it-rain.jpg)
Your watersport fetishes are not to be found here.
95% of Atheists haven't read the Bible. How can you prove something wrong without solid material?99% Christians can't understand science. Did you read scientific book about evolution? How you can prove, that evolution is wrong without solid material?
99% Christians can't understand science.Yep, and from my personal experience 90% atheists can't understand science, either.
95% of Atheists haven't read the Bible.and YOU TOO ;D
It's funny that on both sides I see very little reason and very little loving your enemy.One of the most valid arguments in whole thread, imho.
I believe that there is NO evolution. It's an illusion created by man. God is VERY real, and you will find out the day he comes to the earth with fire and fury.
Yep, and from my personal experience 90% atheists can't understand science, either.Yeah, 99% can't undestand science:D but they don't have to. They just have to work for us that we research:D
Dont you think that evolution is much more "real" than God ?
Of course, there "can be somewhere" God, i didnt say no. But you cant say that God is much more real, because you even dont have any proofs. I think that evolution have at least some.
First, We postulate that if souls exist, then they must have some mass. If they do, then a mole of souls can also have a mass. So, at what rate are souls moving into hell and at what rate are souls leaving? I think we can safely assume that once a soul gets to hell, it will not leave.
Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for souls entering hell, let's look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Some of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, then you will go to hell. Since there are more than one of these religions and people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all people and souls go to hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in hell to increase exponentially.
Now, we look at the rate of change in volume in hell. Boyle's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in hell to stay the same, the ratio of the mass of souls and volume needs to stay constant. Two options exist:
If hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter hell, then the temperature and pressure in hell will increase until all hell breaks loose.
If hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until hell freezes over.
So which is it? If we accept the quote given to me by Theresa Manyan during Freshman year, "that it will be a cold night in hell before I sleep with you" and take into account the fact that I still have NOT succeeded in having sexual relations with her, then Option 2 cannot be true...Thus, hell is exothermic.
First, We postulate that if souls exist, then they must have some mass. If they do, then a mole of souls can also have a mass. So, at what rate are souls moving into hell and at what rate are souls leaving? I think we can safely assume that once a soul gets to hell, it will not leave.http://www.snopes.com/college/exam/hell.asp
Therefore, no souls are leaving. As for souls entering hell, let's look at the different religions that exist in the world today. Some of these religions state that if you are not a member of their religion, then you will go to hell. Since there are more than one of these religions and people do not belong to more than one religion, we can project that all people and souls go to hell. With birth and death rates as they are, we can expect the number of souls in hell to increase exponentially.
Now, we look at the rate of change in volume in hell. Boyle's Law states that in order for the temperature and pressure in hell to stay the same, the ratio of the mass of souls and volume needs to stay constant. Two options exist:
If hell is expanding at a slower rate than the rate at which souls enter hell, then the temperature and pressure in hell will increase until all hell breaks loose.
If hell is expanding at a rate faster than the increase of souls in hell, then the temperature and pressure will drop until hell freezes over.
So which is it? If we accept the quote given to me by Theresa Manyan during Freshman year, "that it will be a cold night in hell before I sleep with you" and take into account the fact that I still have NOT succeeded in having sexual relations with her, then Option 2 cannot be true...Thus, hell is exothermic.