Question for atheists...
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-03-2016, 02:22 PM
RE: Question for atheists...
(21-03-2016 02:19 PM)god has no twitter account Wrote:  
(21-03-2016 01:58 PM)Deesse23 Wrote:  Oh, have you figured yet, what "kind" the Thylacine is?

He has too many questions that he doesn't want to know the answer to.

He'll probably come back as a sock puppet - if he wasn't one already.

Fixed that for ya Tongue
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Deesse23's post
21-03-2016, 02:31 PM
RE: Question for atheists...
When he said "very very very ling time" he was on the right track for the first time since he said it was ludicrous to ask what created the Reality his god exists in.

That's right dingbat.
Evolution works over a very very very long time.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2016, 02:46 PM
RE: Question for atheists...
(21-03-2016 12:44 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Bruh, dogs produce dogs. I don't care how red your face gets. I don't care how much smoke comes out of your ears in anger. I don't care how "tough" you type your words.


Evolution happens on a population level, not an individual scale, you horribly inept fuktard. You'd know this, if you knew anything about evolution. But you don't, so we're not at all surprised. Hence, your terrifying level of purposeful ignorance.



(21-03-2016 12:44 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  The fact still remains. Dogs...produce...DOGS.


Yeah, no shit. But guess what? That's entirely besides the point, which you would already know, if you knew anything about evolution (and not what passes for your personal masturbatory fever-dream strawman bullshit). Adaptive change over time is just that, change over time. Every child was the same species as it's parent's, but given enough generations, a species (as a population) can change drastically.

[Image: 1345066.png]

Where on this chart is the color violet? Can the identify the exact pixel?

Actually, pick any single pixel. Now look above and below that single pixel. Could you call them noticeably different colors? I doubt you can even differentiate between individual pixels, and yet the hues at either end are clearly different colors; even if the change in gradient is so gradual that as you move from one pixel to it's neighbor they're so similar as to be indistinguishable.

This is evolutionary biology explained on a level that a grade school student can understand. So I doubt you will get it, but nobody here can say I didn't try.



(21-03-2016 12:44 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  You, nor anyone you know, has EVER seen anything contrary to this. Yet, you believe that long ago, when no one was CONVENIENTLY around to see it, there were gradual reptile-bird kinds of transformations.


Ironic, coming from the person who purports to believe that what really happened was accurately transcribed by anonymous authors thousands of years ago who they themselves couldn't possibly be eye-witnesses to any of their supposed (and demonstrably false) stories.

Don't you have neighbors to traumatize and a front lawn to get back to fucking? Or have you not yet finished your bleach enema for the day?



(21-03-2016 12:44 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  You can believe that bullshit if you want, but it isn't science, unless you call voodoo science.


You couldn't accurately define 'science' if it was face-fucking you in the back of a Volkswagen, so your personal gauge of what constitutes 'bullshit' is less than useless. You know, like promises made by a mall Santa, or the sweet nothings your pastor whispers into your ears while you play tonsil hockey together.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like EvolutionKills's post
21-03-2016, 03:04 PM
RE: Question for atheists...
(21-03-2016 02:46 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Where on this chart is the color violet? Can the identify the exact pixel?

This specific example was used before. Call's reaction:

(22-02-2016 03:55 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  
(22-02-2016 12:20 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  Did anyone else hear that whistling noise when the point went over his head?

Um no. She showed an image at which she implied that macro evolution is similar to the image. But that is begging the question, because macro evolution is what needs to be proven true.

He doesn't understand what the significance of the image is, because he doesn't understand what the theory of evolution actually says. He also doesn't understand what "begging the question" means.

He doesn't understand much of anything, really.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like Unbeliever's post
21-03-2016, 04:31 PM
RE: Question for atheists...
(21-03-2016 12:58 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  But it does not depend on how that life came to be.

Try again. Preferably with at least thirty seconds' worth of research this time.

Now notice how you didn't address what I said in full. I gave REASONS why abiogenesis is a problem for the theory of evolution, yet instead of addressing the actual REASONS I gave, you just simply made your typical blank ass assertion of "it does not depend on how life came to be".

In fact, you've done this on at least three other occasions. ADDRESS what I SAID about WHY abiogenesis is a PROBLEM. I put it OUT THERE for you to ADDRESS IT, yet you conveniently IGNORED it because you know that it is a problem for your theory. You've done the same thing regarding my question of "What will it take for you to believe that you saw Big Foot" in reference to the discussion of the origins of the disciples belief.

You just blatantly ignored it. Sad.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2016, 04:39 PM
RE: Question for atheists...
Fellas you know I win !Yes

Religion is bullshit. The winner of the last person to post wins thread.Yes
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Leo's post
21-03-2016, 04:43 PM
RE: Question for atheists...
(21-03-2016 04:39 PM)Leo Wrote:  Fellas you know I win !Yes




There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
21-03-2016, 04:45 PM
RE: Question for atheists...
(21-03-2016 12:46 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(21-03-2016 12:44 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  Bruh, dogs produce dogs. I don't care how red your face gets. I don't care how much smoke comes out of your ears in anger. I don't care how "tough" you type your words.

The fact still remains. Dogs...produce...DOGS. You, nor anyone you know, has EVER seen anything contrary to this. Yet, you believe that long ago, when no one was CONVENIENTLY around to see it, there were gradual reptile-bird kinds of transformations.

You can believe that bullshit if you want, but it isn't science, unless you call voodoo science.

WailOfTheChild thinking he knows what science is and isn't. How cute. Bless his little heart.

Who's wail of the child ? You are talking about crap of the wild or fart of the wild?

Religion is bullshit. The winner of the last person to post wins thread.Yes
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-03-2016, 05:06 PM
RE: Question for atheists...
(21-03-2016 04:31 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  I gave REASONS why abiogenesis is a problem for the theory of evolution

No. You didn't.

The rest of your post was ignored because it was stupid. Painfully so. And, in any case, the response boils down to exactly what I said before.

You didn't make an argument. You made a series of rambling, disconnected statements which absolutely failed to establish that evolution depends on abiogenesis. I'm sure you believe you made an argument, but as these discussions stand as testament, what you believe and what is actually true are rarely the same thing.

Evolution happens whether abiogenesis is true or a god created the organisms in question. You seem to be assuming that evolution demands that there is no god, which is nonsense; evolution does not give a damn about the existence or non-existence of gods or their possible involvement in the creation of life. It deals strictly with what happens once life exists. Whether or not a god created it is utterly irrelevant.

This is not a complicated concept. But then, nothing put to you thus far has been, and you haven't understood a word, so I really don't think anyone is the least bit surprised here.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Unbeliever's post
21-03-2016, 06:13 PM
RE: Question for atheists...
(21-03-2016 05:06 PM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(21-03-2016 04:31 PM)Call_of_the_Wild Wrote:  I gave REASONS why abiogenesis is a problem for the theory of evolution

No. You didn't.

The rest of your post was ignored because it was stupid. Painfully so. And, in any case, the response boils down to exactly what I said before.

You didn't make an argument. You made a series of rambling, disconnected statements which absolutely failed to establish that evolution depends on abiogenesis. I'm sure you believe you made an argument, but as these discussions stand as testament, what you believe and what is actually true are rarely the same thing.

Evolution happens whether abiogenesis is true or a god created the organisms in question. You seem to be assuming that evolution demands that there is no god, which is nonsense; evolution does not give a damn about the existence or non-existence of gods or their possible involvement in the creation of life. It deals strictly with what happens once life exists. Whether or not a god created it is utterly irrelevant.

This is not a complicated concept. But then, nothing put to you thus far has been, and you haven't understood a word, so I really don't think anyone is the least bit surprised here.

Many Christians believe that their god started the process (life0 and it evolved from there. So, Wail of the child doesn't even know his own cult. They are two different subjects. There is no absolute boundary between life and non-life. So the entire "abiogenesis" thing is basically a red-herring.

Evolutionary biochemists know how the precursors to, and life, could have developed, with no outside agency. We don't know how it happened. We do know that Evolution did happen. *He* doesn't, as he's amazingly ignorant, and wallows in that ignorance.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: