No More Personal Attacks!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
It has nothing to do with not undestanding, in fact most athiests are very well educated about religion, some more than most Christians. It is a choice because we have learned a skill called questioning. The church could not answer a single question I had, and when you remove yourself from that circular trust called faith, it becomes very clear that it is mostly a farce. A farce that some people need though, so I respect that!
Im merely saying how I see it....no offence there. I might be wrong, but i doubt it.
 
Why? Who created the creator?

What evolved first the chicken or the egg? Why is a banana the shape it is, Why do lemons and oranges rich in vitamin C become ripe just before winter when humans need the boost of VitaC for extra protection. There are as many questions as any answer/argument you can muster. Truth is we do not know and the scientists are trying to find the solutions But DNA manipulation facts is becoming a more feasible avenue to explore than the rest of the unproven theories. But if someone believes in nothing what the point of debating ?
 
True...but thats how WE know it...I bet you, if it took like 1000 000 years for a worm to reach the stage of a butterfly, people would 10 to 1 call it evolution...think about it...We can only preach science up to now...because thats all we know...what we think cant happen in the future, would also 10 to 1 be reveiled in the future.

You are right, we DO know it. What we refer to as evolution is merely a word used to describe the process. So even if it did take 1000,000 years we would still refer to it as evolution. The legth of time is pretty irrelevant, its the process.

BTW - going back to the souls question. If someone made a clone of you (very possible) would that clone share your soul, be soulless, or take on another soul and therefore not actually be your clone? Or do you think that maybe souls arent all they are cracked up to be by the church?
 
Right, I get it now... Rofl. How elementary.



Truly and utterly!

No sorry you didn't get it. The point I was trying to make is that in that situation most of the athiests would suddenly become belivers rather rapidly. :D
 
What evolved first the chicken or the egg? Why is a banana the shape it is, Why do lemons and oranges rich in vitamin C become ripe just before winter when humans need the boost of VitaC for extra protection.
Then at the very least you are agnostic (without knowledge) on those issues - i.e. you don't know and won't commit to an answer until you do know. So at the very least, why are you not agnostic with respect to the idea of a God? You have no proof that he exists and no proof that he doesn't exist, so why not remain neutral until you do have proof?
 
What evolved first the chicken or the egg? Why is a banana the shape it is, Why do lemons and oranges rich in vitamin C become ripe just before winter when humans need the boost of VitaC for extra protection. There are as many questions as any answer/argument you can muster. Truth is we do not know and the scientists are trying to find the solutions But DNA manipulation facts is becoming a more feasible avenue to explore than the rest of the unproven theories. But if someone believes in nothing what the point of debating ?

Did you know that lemons, oranges and other flowering plants have existed for about 425 million years?
 
What evolved first the chicken or the egg? Why is a banana the shape it is, Why do lemons and oranges rich in vitamin C become ripe just before winter when humans need the boost of VitaC for extra protection. There are as many questions as any answer/argument you can muster. Truth is we do not know and the scientists are trying to find the solutions But DNA manipulation facts is becoming a more feasible avenue to explore than the rest of the unproven theories. But if someone believes in nothing what the point of debating ?

The chicken evolved first - the egg may have changed shape depending on how the chicken's arse evolved, which I suppose can be construed as adapting to your surroundings. But either way, it was the chicken. Although if you are asking which CAME first, it was he egg as proven by evolution.

DNA manipulation is a proven theory? Might have misinterpreted you here but I am sure you didnt intend to imply this did you? So, aliens coming down and manipulating our DNA to suit their needs is more feasible than adapting to our surroundings? :eek:
 
No sorry you didn't get it. The point I was trying to make is that in that situation most of the athiests would suddenly become belivers rather rapidly. :D

Not so much. I think any South African athiest is proof of that. We face death merely walking out our door. I faced cancer a few years back and gave life, religion and the after-life some major thought. I came to the conclusion that I am more than happy with my current beliefs, or lack thereof.

Damn. Shoo, go away UnoPanelvan. This isnt an invitation to derail.
 
Then at the very least you are agnostic (without knowledge) on those issues - i.e. you don't know and won't commit to an answer until you do know. So at the very least, why are you not agnostic with respect to the idea of a God? You have no proof that he exists and no proof that he doesn't exist, so why not remain neutral until you do have proof?

So explain it to me as you are not so "agnostic" You assumed again what I say. I stated that creation by design in IMHO is more likely than evolution based on the facts that scientist can manipulate DNA and are busy exploring and finding new facts on a daily rate. faster than prove or facts from any of the other spheres. So IMHO creation by DNA manipulation was much more probable. Only the future will tell so lets leave it there. No point in debating this further as we are both agnostic about the real truth and facts. :D
 
So does many thousands of star gazers too. Why refer to him? :rolleyes:

Why sarcasm if you cannot debate or debunk the point? Give me alternates to explore.

Thousands of stargazers believe that aliens abducted us and manipulated our DNA? The largest group who believe this are Scientologists, a religion begun by L Ron Hubbard. Hence it was a very applicable post. You are getting far too defensive to actually have a debate with man.

And trust me, I am more than capable of debating.
 
Not so much. I think any South African athiest is proof of that. We face death merely walking out our door. I faced cancer a few years back and gave life, religion and the after-life some major thought. I came to the conclusion that I am more than happy with my current beliefs, or lack thereof.

Damn. Shoo, go away UnoPanelvan. This isnt an invitation to derail.

So who is doing the derailing then? LOL :rolleyes:
 
So explain it to me as you are not so "agnostic" You assumed again what I say. I stated that creation by design in IMHO is more likely than evolution based on the facts that scientist can manipulate DNA and are busy exploring and finding new facts on a daily rate. faster than prove or facts from any of the other spheres. So IMHO creation by DNA manipulation was much more probable. Only the future will tell so lets leave it there. No point in debating this further as we are both agnostic about the real truth and facts. :D

I can manipulate the structure of my latop with a baseball bat if I choose to. It doesnt mean that I am responsible for the creation of all laptops.
 
What evolved first the chicken or the egg?
Evolved? The chicken, of course.
Why is a banana the shape it is,
because it works?
Why do lemons and oranges rich in vitamin C become ripe just before winter when humans need the boost of VitaC for extra protection.
You are misinterpreting causality. The question is: why are there so few humans that don't eat oranges and lemons just before winter?
There are as many questions as any answer/argument you can muster.
True but it helps to ask the right question.
Truth is we do not know and the scientists are trying to find the solutions
Yes, thus we have theories and hypotheses.
But DNA manipulation facts is becoming a more feasible avenue to explore than the rest of the unproven theories. But if someone believes in nothing what the point of debating ?
WTF? I almost followed your reasoning for a whole post, but what does this mean?
 
Thousands of stargazers believe that aliens abducted us and manipulated our DNA? The largest group who believe this are Scientologists, a religion begun by L Ron Hubbard. Hence it was a very applicable post. You are getting far too defensive to actually have a debate with man.

And trust me, I am more than capable of debating.

Not defensive at all. Waiting for the facts and truth that supports your viewpoints. Its not me that have the habit of making comments and compliment it with a sarcastic icon. I am sure the Scientology religion creator you refer to had no knowledge of what the scientists do today. So it is a interesting concept that his beliefs in DNA manipulation as you stated can be achieved by scientists today. Not?
 
1) Bacteria are several times larger than oxygen molecules. It's impossible to have bacteria "in" the oxygen.
"several times", lol --- sure, if by "several times larger" you mean 'millions and millions of times larger' :D ... (I guess you intended that as hyperbolic understatement, but I suspect some might take you literally.)

No guys, long story short...As we all know, the brain is much stronger/intellgent than a Computers Cpu...so "something/someone" had to create it...Stuff like this doent just "poof" come out of no where...

It's probably been mentioned before, so sorry if I'm being redundant (haven't read the whole thread), but for anyone interested in this topic, "Climbing Mount Improbable" is an excellent read.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X